Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Overend
It's certainly possible that better sourcing might exist, so no prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can actually show that, but nominator is correct that the sourcing present here consists almost entirely of glancing namechecks of his existence in coverage of other things, not coverage that's substantively ''about him'' for the purposes of getting him over . And nothing claimed in the article entitles him to an automatic ''presumption'' of notability in the ''absence'' of enough sourcing to clear GNG, either
— User:Bearcat, 19:10, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)