Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher D'Elia
as I said above, meeting one of the notability criteria of WP:PROF without an independent source backing up the claim is ''not enough to meet WP:PROF''. So if you are saying that he meets WP:PROF, you're welcome to point out the independent sources that confirm any of those claims. Since you asked about my reasons, PROF in my opinion is an abomination because unlike any other notability guideline I'm aware of, it makes notability independent of coverage in secondary sources and tacks the requirement of independent sources on as an afterthought, which leads to many people (including every single "keep" !vote in this discussion that argues PROF) forgetting about that part and claiming that an article with no reliable secondary sources whatsoever beyond a database free of interpretation can establish that the subject is notable ''and is appropriate for Wikipedia''. Google Scholar's citation count will not allow us to write an encyclopedia article. I have not seen anybody beyond Onel5969 provide an independent source that ''discusses the subject'', and that one is local gossip, basically. So in short, I do not think sufficient secondary sources exist to write a meaningful article about this person, and Wikipedia articles should not just be a summary of primary sources. That's , part of WP:NOR, which is policy and trumps notability guidelines. The article does not meet one of our core content policies, and I have seen no indication that it's salvageable
— User:Huon, 18:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:PRIMARY (Wikipedia:No original research)