Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Authors

WP:DSAUTHOR

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Authors. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Authors|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Authors. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

For the general policy on the inclusion of individual people in Wikipedia, see WP:BIO.

Authors

Robert Schleip

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Insufficiently notable per WP:NPROF. While the subject does get a text box at doi:10.1126/science.318.5854.1234 this is not enough. Other sources are unreliable and/or being used as a coatrack for questionable biomedical content. Bon courage (talk) 09:42, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Germany. Shellwood (talk) 10:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
lean keep he is a full professor at TUM, one of the leading German research Universities and his GS profile looks quite decent with an h index of 42 and a total of 18 articles with 100+ citations. Also there is a (short) profile in this Science article. --hroest 13:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP The User:Bon_courage who added this deletion notice is a paid pharma editor who's targeting this page because I'm working on edits for Rolfing. If you look at the Talk:Robert_Schleip there's already been a healthy discussion and was ruled against. EricAhlqvistScott (talk) 16:33, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Biology, and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:01, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Liz Lamere

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Lack of independant notability. Most refs are about Alan Vega. TheLongTone (talk) 13:36, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Women, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 14:00, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — Liz Lamere clearly meets Wikipedia’s notability standards as a musician, producer, and author with significant, sustained coverage in multiple independent and reliable sources, including Rolling Stone, The New York Times, Pitchfork, and Magnet Magazine. Her career spans over three decades, during which she co-produced three posthumous Alan Vega albums — It, Mutator, and Insurrection — all covered in major media outlets. Lamere has released two solo albums on In The Red Records and co-authored Infinite Dreams: The Life of Alan Vega, a professionally published biography featuring a foreword by Bruce Springsteen. Her work has received independent attention beyond her association with Vega, and the article is supported by 17 citations from high-quality sources. This is clearly more than trivial or incidental notability. Cannery Row (talk) 14:58, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep enough coverage on her own accord to set her apart from Alan Vega connection--Burroughs'10 (talk) 17:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter J. Lewis

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject was previously weakly deleted in 2010 at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Lewis (philosopher) (3rd nomination). Since then they have apparently published a book with some reviews, but on the face of it the article still seems to fall short of notability for an academic. BD2412 T 20:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Authors. BD2412 T 20:46, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lean Keep since the last time this was up he's gone from Associate Professor at a flagship state university to full professor at an Ivy. His H-Index has gone from 10 to 18 according to Google scholar and he's continuing to publish in top journals (and book chapters with top presses). The book has been cited quite a bit and by our notability standards, if we think he's not notable, the article should be redirected to the book title and an article on the book created. Jahaza (talk) 21:25, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not convinced that the book itself is notable. BD2412 T 00:45, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - A bit WP:OTHERSTUFFy, but if this is notable... - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:37, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, England, California, Florida, and New Hampshire. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as above. A good citation presence in a low cited area. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Neutral on the article. The citation record is borderline for WP:PROF#C1 (although maybe strong for philosophy) and one book isn't enough for me for WP:AUTHOR. But the book is definitely notable: the article currently lists three reviews (Sebens, Shaw, and Garcia) and I found three more: : Valia Allori, Philosophy of Science, JSTOR 26551953; Ben Novak, The Review of Metaphysics, JSTOR 44806993; Alyssa Ney, Metascience, doi:10.1007/s11016-017-0232-8. With six in-depth independent reliable sources it passes WP:GNG. If the biography is deemed non-notable, it would still be possible to have an article on the book and redirect to it. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:21, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep The topic appears notable. The prior deletion is somewhat antiquated. However, I still cannot observe a substantial enhancement in coverage regarding the subject CresiaBilli (talk) 06:31, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Since the last 2010 AfD has had a book published by Oxford University Press and moved from associate professor at a good regional university to full professor at Dartmouth, with good citation numbers for a low-citation field. -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 09:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unclear why all of that would make the subject notable, other than the citation numbers, which (as David Eppstein mentioned above) seem borderline, at least to me. Can you refer to any other criterion of Wikipedia:NPROF that you believe this subject meets? Because one book wouldn't be enough, generally. Qflib (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In addition to the above, I note that his article-length works aren't just cited in passing; his work has started some long-standing conversations in the philosophy of science. See, e.g., the opening line of this paper. Here and here are papers in that conversation where Lewis's name is literally the first thing that appears in the abstract. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:57, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ricardo Javier Ponce Herrera

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable biography. The article is currently a brief puffery about the subject's work in spiritual/self-healing, sourced to one newspaper advertisement for his trademarked version of spiritual healing. However, when trying to find if sources exist for Ponce, I found quite a bit of coverage; however, it's almost all WP:BLPCRIME so might not establish notability for the encyclopedia: a tabloid(?) article about a 2021 allegation of Ponce leading a cult masked by his healing work^[1] followed by quite a bit of coverage in what appears to be reliable sources of the government taking the allegations seriously and conducting an investigation^[2]^[3] including in some American media^[4] followed by coverage of Ponce's denial of the allegations in Mexican^[5] and American^[6] media. However, I can't tell if there's lasting coverage of this allegation: the most recent information, a 2025 tabloid(?) article, describes por supuestos antecedentes penales de Ricardo Ponce,^[7] translating to "Ricardo Ponce's alleged criminal record". Without a conviction, including any of this would probably run afoul of WP:BLPCRIME although a case could be made that the spread to international news might make it notable nonetheless. I'd welcome an editor with better knowledge of Spanish to chime in on the sourcing here. Also worth noting that an article on Ponce has been repeatedly deleted for notability from the Spanish Wikipedia.

References

^ "La youtuber Maire Wink acusó a Ricardo Ponce de crear una secta y abusar sexualmente de mujeres". Infobae (in Spanish). 2021-05-29. Archived from the original on 2021-05-30.
^ Martinez, Rafael (2021-06-03). "Catean hotel en Bacalar tras denuncias de abuso sexual en contra de Ricardo Ponce". El Sol de México (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2025-06-12.
^ "Indagan denuncias de abuso contra gurú Ricardo Ponce en Quintana Roo". El Siglo de Torreón (in Spanish). 2021-06-03. Archived from the original on 2024-05-04.
^ Pérez, Jazive (2021-06-03). "Del paraíso al infierno del abuso sexual: Revelaciones en un grupo de autosanación en México" (in Spanish). KVEA. Archived from the original on 2021-06-04.
^ Omar Fierro, Juan (2021-06-14). "Ricardo Ponce, el 'gurú de la autosanación', pide no ser crucificado tras denuncia de abuso sexual". Proceso (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2021-06-14.
^
- "Expareja de Ricardo Ponce responde a las acusaciones de abuso sexual en contra del conferencista". Hoy Día (in Spanish). Telemundo. 2021-06-08. Archived from the original on 2021-06-08.
- "Ricardo Ponce se defiende de las acusaciones de abuso sexual y dice que son 'un montaje'". Hoy Día (in Spanish). 2021-10-15. Telemundo. Archived from the original on 2025-06-12.
^ Chávez M, Javier (2025-02-05). "Marianne Gonzaga: ¿Quién es la influencer que fue detenida por apuñalar a la novia de su ex pareja?". Milenio (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2025-02-06.

Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 17:11, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Crime, Spirituality, Medicine, and Mexico. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 17:11, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I know little of Afd, but the sole reference ("First human being to scientifically prove the ability to self-heal", indeed -- same article twice, and the second iteration is 404) reeks of a paid newspaper insert. Moscow Mule (talk) 00:04, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The sources included in this AFD are reliable sources. The sources in the article appear to be sponsored content as they were written (even one has a "branded content" caption): "La Hekalogía®, "ciencia del poder sanador interior"..." Why would a newspaper add a registered trademark symbol if it weren't being paid by the trademark owner? El Heraldo is archived here. Both shouldn't be considered as reliable here because of that as they fail WP:RSMED as they make the questionable assertion that Hekalogía "demonstrated 'progressive chakra alignment, improved coherence in brain waves, and an increase in the body’s energy field'", in a study that have not been published or peer reviewed. Regarding the sexual abuse accusations, he won his case, so the sources will unduly focus on something that didn't happen. If es.wiki didn't accept this 5 times, and they have a lot of trash, then, why would we? (CC) Tbhotch^™ 03:09, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not a means of promotion or advertising. See WP:NOTPROMO. Both citations, one of which is now dead, are promoting a 22 June "presentation" in Mexico City for "Hekalogica". One article mentions research conducted by University of Zulia being published, but this is not cited. If academic works about this person exist, then those sources should be cited directly, not mentioned in passing in an advertisement that passes itself off as news. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 09:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Rogat Loeb

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article only contains 1 source and makes lots of uncited claims. Not finding coverage to meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 05:25, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United States of America. LibStar (talk) 05:25, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, California, and Washington. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:40, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I indicated to the wikipedia editor who originally asked some questions on the site, it was created by a fan. I then added some updates, for instance It said I was writing regularly for Huffington Post. They published maybe 100 articles, but I'm not currently writing so I changed it to past tense. Part of the challenges is that I left writing for 12 years to run two nonprofits I founded where I wasn't able to write political pieces without making them politically vulnerable. So there are a ton of articles about me if you search "Paul Rogat Loeb" in Google or another search engine. But not all of them have the updated information because most are before 2012. So I could go through various statements in the wikisource and add links, but it would be time consuming. And there aren't public numbers on say how many copies I've sold, though there are probably articles among those for instance covering my lectures, that mention how many were sold at that time the articles were written.

So that's why I linked to the website.

Can you suggest how best to proceed without spending endless hours, like searching every publication and creating a separate link? I really value Wikipedia and would like to have that listing remain.

Thanks Paul Rogat Loeb PaulLoeb (talk) 01:22, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmad Ali Karim

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Pundit whose article is primarily sourced to pieces written by themself, and is really only known for WP:ONEEVENT – the controversial filing a report for sedition against the Chief Minister Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 13:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 13:42, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This is a clear case of WP:ONEEVENT and the subject is the author of several of the sources cited - that makes the sources more of primary sources than independent secondary sources. Patre23 (talk) 15:25, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Politics. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TOOSOON. He's 22 years old. Bearian (talk) 19:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jayshree Misra Tripathi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article does not meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR the specific notability guidelines and the sources cited in this article are not considered as WP:SIG. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Women, Poetry, and India. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:44, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Delhi and Odisha. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:51, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep I have added reviews of her work, though the 2025 book is an edited book so it accounts less towards notability. I also revised the page and removed citations that were non-notable mentions of Tripathi. DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nagamani Srinath

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NMUSICIAN and WP:GNG. Winning an award does not grant inherent notability. Sources are mainly WP:NEWSORGINDIA. CNMall41 (talk) 18:29, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Women, Music, and Indiana. CNMall41 (talk) 18:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - per nom. SachinSwami (talk) 18:50, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per Nomination Destinyokhiria (talk) 07:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: if the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award is really "the highest Indian recognition given to people in the field of performing arts.", then this loks like notability. PamD 15:16, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that she has an article in Telugu Wikipedia - I have merged her two records in Wikidata, so it now shows as a link from the en.wiki article. PamD 15:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Wikidata merge. I understand your contention but do not believe notability is inherent for simply winning an award. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:48, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 OK, looking at WP:MUSICBIO, criteria 7 and 8 appear to be met, unless you consider that 8 only applies to western popular music. PamD 19:51, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think something on the level the award is being claimed to be would fall under that criteria so Western/India would have no bearing. What I am saying is that even with an award, we still need significant coverage. Just winning an award does not guarantee notability. It even specifically says "may" be notable under that criteria. The sources we have are pour such as this (presented in the comment below) which is clearly unreliable as WP:NEWSORGINDIA. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- In addition to the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award, Nagamani Srinath was also honored with the Rajyotsava Award in 1998, the second-highest civilian honor conferred by the Karnataka Government[1]. Furthermore, according to an article published in The New Indian Express on June 22, 2015, she was awarded the Sangita Kala Acharya Award by the Madras Music Academy, Chennai, for her outstanding contributions to the field of Carnatic music[2].-SachinSwami (talk) 16:35, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to this source she has won some other notable awards such as Karnataka Kalashree. Also she has significant coverage in The Hindu and Deccan Herald.Afstromen (talk) 05:42, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Afstromen, all the sources I included don’t fully support the claim; they are all weak. Mentioning an award alone isn’t enough; you need sources that clearly reference Nagamani Srinath’s work, like a review. For example, in Akaal: The Unconquered, when I checked, all the sources you added were weak. Later, I searched and added 5 reviews in the Reception section, which are sufficient to fully support the film and pass WP:GNG. Though the rules for films and individuals differ, reviews clearly referencing the work are sufficient for support. (I have no intention of misleading editors, so I apologize.) SachinSwami (talk) 08:39, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Afstromen: you duplicated one of the sources which could indicate you did not look closely enough at them to see they are mainly routine announcements. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:54, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CNMall41 Are you talking about The Hindu article or both?Afstromen (talk) 17:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You listed the DH twice in your comment. Both the DH and The Hindu are her giving the information by the way. Interviews and all content provided by her so not independent. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh No, I listed the source initially to point the awards. It was not my intention to list it twice or to give the impression that the sources were different. Afstromen (talk) 17:50, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shantanu Naidu

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to establish notability independent of his association with Ratan Tata, per WP:GNG, WP:AUTHOR, WP:BIO, and WP:INHERITED.

His startups do not meet WP:NCORP due to modest scale and event-specific reporting, and the book lacks significant critical reviews or awards to satisfy WP:AUTHOR. Zuck28 (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Businesspeople, India, and Maharashtra. Zuck28 (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Zuck28, Before taking any abrupt or random action, always ensure proper research is done and all sources are thoroughly verified. Acting without accurate information can lead to serious consequences and misunderstandings. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 18:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Vinod Sharma

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject does not meet Wikipedia’s notability criteria for a standalone article under Wp:GNG, Wp:BIO or Wp:ACADEMIC.

While Sharma is associated with a Guinness World Record for the largest memory lesson (2018), there is insufficient significant coverage in multiple reliable, secondary sources to establish notability. Zuck28 (talk) 16:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Authors, Businesspeople, Health and fitness, Science, Medicine, and India. Zuck28 (talk) 16:56, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete none of these sources are WP:SIGCOV that I can see, they are short blurbs (even those that I could translate from Hindi). A world record by itself does not confer notability especially as these can be essentially purchased. Clearly doesnt pass WP:NPROF. --hroest 18:27, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear! @Hannes Röst, No, Guinness World Records titles cannot be purchased. 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 19:01, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they can, pretty much. They're a marketing gimmick from a novelty publisher. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 05:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How ? Any reference or Discussion available ? 𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 09:15, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think the criticism is that you can make up some really niche record like "most 10W light bulbs lit at the same time" and pay for the items to be delivered and get the people from Guinness in to confirm the record and bam you have yourself a record. AFAIK the Guinness people dont care what the record is as long as it can be verifiable and can be broken by someone else and you pay a fee (see for example this recent record for most glass bottles trapped with a Slinky in 1 minute). --hroest 13:50, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's own article about the Guinness Book explains, in polite terms, how it's a racket. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 15:21, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article meets notability guidelines under WP:GNG and WP:BIO according to sources. The subject has received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources.𝒮-𝒜𝓊𝓇𝒶 19:00, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with the evaluations by the nominator and by hroest. This is an advertisement and should be removed as such. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 15:23, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David A. Andelman

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to be notable. My searches on Google came up with only a French article about him receiving an award. The page is heavily edited by the subject of the article. Pxldnky77 (talk) 10:52, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Politicians, and Journalism. Pxldnky77 (talk) 10:52, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: France, Massachusetts, and Missouri. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are so many reasons that autobiography is inevitably bad for a non-profit encyclopedia: it involves original research, the subject wants to censor out the uncomfortable truths about themselves, and it's a breach of our charitable status, as self-dealing, which tax status is already being attacked by the richest man in the World and his once again BFF. Bearian (talk) 18:55, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Snowdon

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Previous PROD (endorsed and deleted) for a subject who has no secondary sources, does not meet WP:NAUTHOR nor WP:JOURNALIST. The subject's claim to a PhD cannot be verified - I wrote to the alleged awarding institution as neither I nor others could find any PhD and the institution provided no information. The restoration of this one seems to have been an error, caught up in this mass restore of soft deleted articles [3] where discussion shows that the dePRODer intended to restore sports bios PRODed by a particular user, but included this one apprently by accident. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:42, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Journalism, and United Kingdom. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:42, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:SIRS so fails WP:GNG. UtherSRG (talk) 11:08, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:44, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—Fails all of the above. This is a waste of time. Anwegmann (talk) 21:40, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ritam Chowdhury

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Declined prod. Created by a single purpose editor. Only 2 sources, 1 being Amazon that doesn't even mention Chowdhury. Does not meet WP:AUTHOR, WP:PROF or WP:BIO. Note that a single purpose editor has been editing this article so possible WP:COI. LibStar (talk) 04:05, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Medicine, and India. LibStar (talk) 04:05, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I went through the list of edits and noticed that multiple minor edits along the way had deleted many citations and references for this page slowly over time. Tried adding a few things back in. Not sure the subject of this page is actively keeping tabs on these edits. Would recommend against deletion at this time. Freddiced (talk) 04:11, 6 June 2025 (UTC)— Freddiced (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
@Freddiced, do you know or have any connection to Ritam Chowdhury? LibStar (talk) 04:13, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@LibStar Know as in i know the page as i had edited it a long time ago. Beyond that no - dont know this person IRL or have any connections personal or professional with them. Freddiced (talk) 04:20, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Freddiced, so why have you edited this article after 7 years not editing? LibStar (talk) 04:23, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@LibStarLike i said im not a regular editor. I help when i can. I had some time to kill today. Was just checking on the pages i had edited in the past and noticed the notice for deletion on this one specifically. Tried to fix some of it. Apologies if I overstepped. Upto you and other senior mods/editors if yall want to delete this or other pages. Thanks! Freddiced (talk) 04:28, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@LibStar noticed a lot of the information on this page since has been deleted slowly over time. this also included actual references and citations. im not a professional wikipedia contributor. Freddiced (talk) 04:22, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Poetry, Delhi, Maharashtra, and West Bengal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:11, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom and fails to pass GNG, SIGCOV and nauthor. Fade258 (talk) 09:26, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – All sources are of poor quality, and no sources are found on Google either. I agree with LibStar's opinion. Importantly, the page creator Lsmithcoops [4] (2015-02-04) and Freddiced [5] (2015-02-05) have their account IDs registered with a one-day difference. - SachinSwami (talk) 20:01, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Draftify‎. Consensus is against retention Star Mississippi 16:32, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Chavez

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. This article was created by a paid editor (User:CJ for superset) and later defended by another paid editor (User:Lauren at L Strategies), who disclosed being compensated by Laurel Strategies to represent Tom Chavez (see disclosure).

The article fails WP:GNG — there is no significant, in-depth, independent coverage of the subject in reliable secondary sources. References such as TechCrunch and Business Insider are not independent coverage but rather pay-to-play or brief startup mentions that fail to demonstrate notability. There are no profiles, features, or critical discussions of the subject that meet Wikipedia’s standards.

This article has seen no neutral editorial participation and reads like a press release. The promotional tone and sourcing violate WP:NPOV and WP:NOTPROMO, and the COI history undermines the integrity of the content. Cumulus-wizard-1850 (talk) 02:03, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Computing, California, Massachusetts, and New Mexico. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:40, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - just a mess of paid-editor churnalism. Obvious WP:PROMO material. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 17:14, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, the article was created as a draft and published to mainspace after review by an apparently neutral editor.

The "defence" complained of consists solely of removing the nom's PROD template—an acceptable action, CoI having been previously declared.

I have just outlined in depth in response to the nom's WP:COIN ticket on this article why "the COI history undermines the integrity of the content" is badly over-egging the case. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:05, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Andy. I raised the COI point only because all substantive text was written by the paid drafter, with only cosmetic tweaks since, and the PROD tag was removed by another COI editor. I wanted to deter a Delete discussion dominated solely by COI arguments so the wider community can decide.

Putting COI aside, the sourcing remains thin: one 2001 Los Angeles Times feature that profiles the Chavez family rather than Tom specifically, plus routine deal coverage in TechCrunch, Business Insider, a brief WSJ item, and several self-published or op-ed pieces. There is no in-depth, independent coverage of Chavez himself, so the article does not satisfy WP:GNG. — Cumulus-wizard-1850 (talk) 01:28, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If this is designed to "deter a Delete discussion dominated solely by COI arguments", what would your attempt to ensure one look like? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:15, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The only thing I find that is a reliable source and independent and significantly about him is the SF Examiner article, and that is not enough for GNG. I see mentions, some nice articles about his parents, and reporting on companies that his companies funded. He is undoubtedly successful but the sourcing just isn't there. I will keep an eye on this in case someone finds better sources. Lamona (talk) 03:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Thanks everyone for weighing in here. As mentioned above by Pigsonthewing, the subject was deemed notable and published by a neutral editor, Megalibrarygirl, after review. This was published after the article was created as well, and I believe it would be considered in-depth coverage. Lastly, I'll point out that this nomination curiously appears to have come from a WP:SPA; as a disclosed COI editor myself, I hope we are all operating in good faith. Lauren at L Strategies (talk) 14:05, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the Fastcompany article, and although it is long it is more anecdotal than informational, more informal than analytical. I'm confident it could be used to support certain facts, but it is low on detail. His entire career from 1998 to 2016 is covered in a single paragraph, one sentence per startup, with statements so vague I have no idea what their business really was. I also want to mention that sources 7, 8, & 9 are not independent, and better sources are needed for their content. Lamona (talk) 03:50, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move back to draft to provide an opportunity for the issues raised by delete voters to be addressed. BD2412 T 03:03, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Lamona's reasoning. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:51, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Christian Tschuggnall

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Refbombed promotion for non notable musician. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Has drummed with a lot of projects but lacks independent notability. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:11, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Bands and musicians, Austria, and Germany. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:38, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is sufficient significant coverage that satisfies GNG requirements to show the subject's notability as a musician. CresiaBilli (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:VAGUEWAVE, WP:SOURCESEXIST. You have not identified any actual coverage. One of multiple throw away boilerplate !votes recently from this individual. duffbeerforme (talk) 10:15, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kindly refrain from duplicating your identical content beneath all my votes and comments.CresiaBilli (talk) 12:10, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: so far, i don't see the significant coverage in indepentent sources to pass gng, at least with what is currently cited in the article. Tschuggnall seems to have co-written a textbook; finding a lot of websites to buy it online, but no in-depth coverage about him. I'll try to find more sources the next days. Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - total lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. Facebook, his own website, blogs, and sources about other people don't contribute to notability. Bearian (talk) 16:30, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:55, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: wasn't able to find independent wp:sigcov of him; almost every piece of online coverage is either passing mentions or not independent. I couldn't assess this paywalled source. Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 12:55, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I Rivers

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is about an anonymous person, with the only source being an interview (cited on the publisher’s website). The article mainly consists of a long quote from a book review. I couldn’t find any independent in-depth sources to establish notability for this person. Blackballnz (talk) 00:49, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: So an anonymous author publishes a book and there's no sourcing 20 years later? That doesn't get you notability... I can't find any sources, and the one in the article isn't good enough... There just isn't enough for an article. Oaktree b (talk) 00:59, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Malaysia, and Singapore. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:35, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:01, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andrei Popescu (author)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seems like a pretty random guy, with no in-depth coverage, just some self-generated, promotional profiles. Biruitorul ^Talk 18:22, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Romania. Shellwood (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:31, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:12, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: not a vote (yet) but I don't think the article title is sufficient to differentiate this Andrei Popescu from possibly 1-2 other academics with the same name. I am having a hard time finding information about the crypto Popescu compared to the mathematician Popescu. Moritoriko (talk) 00:21, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the method would be to search in conjunction with his books. Geschichte (talk) 06:40, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 06:51, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: In my searching I have found the textbook but it is pretty recent so nothing shows that it is notable (yet). Looking at his and other finance gscholar profiles he seems to be in the low-mid range for cites, primarily buoyed off two papers. As for business profiles everything I saw is connected to him or not good enough source wise. comment: the following is not part of my delete opinion but the author is currently under sock investigation as part of a multi-year promotional sock-farm. Moritoriko (talk) 09:19, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Samir Saran

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article does not meet Wikipedia’s rules for biographies of notable people (WP:NBIO). Even though Samir Saran has important roles at the Observer Research Foundation and The Asia Group, there aren’t enough reliable news articles that talk about him in detail. Most of the sources either come from him or only mention him briefly. The few news sources that do mention him (like The Indian Express or ThePrint) are either opinion pieces, short articles he wrote himself. WP:NOTCV. Charlie (talk) 14:38, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Charlie (talk) 14:38, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:03, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delhi-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:41, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seems notable at firstglance but needs to be cited with more reliable news reference and the trimming of content needed.Almandavi (talk) 06:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 08:20, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment - The books "The New World Disorder and the Indian Imperative"[6] and "PAX SINICA: Implications for the Indian Dawn" [7], written by Samir Saran, have reviews that explicitly mention his name. These books have been described as balanced and thought-provoking in reviews published in The Hindu and Business Standard, ensuring they do not come across as one-sided or propagandistic. Additionally, Saran’s co-authors (Tharoor and Dev) have balanced his perspectives, making the books feel like part of an intellectual discourse rather than propaganda. Saran also writes as a columnist for The Hindu [8], Indian Express [9], Hindustan Times [10], and ThePrint [11]. Furthermore, there is an New Statesman interview source focusing on Samir Saran’s views as an expert on India-US relations, global politics, and India’s geopolitical role, highlighting his contributions and influence as the president of the Observer Research Foundation and a foreign policy analyst[12]. -SachinSwami (talk) 15:20, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Samir Saran is neither a subject-matter expert nor has he undertaken any formal research on the topics he frequently writes about, which range from the depths of the Earth to the core of the Sun. He currently heads a think tank that receives funding from his former employer, Reliance Industries Limited. So, let's not overglorify his role as a babysitter of retired bureaucrats and professionals—many of whom have previously done favors for Reliance and are now being accommodated in that very think tank (read here for more details). Besides all of these, co-authoring books by piggy backing on others and then arranging for them to be reviewed holds little value unless his own individual contributions have genuine impact within academic circles. So at this moment or any given moment, he neither satisfies WP:NAUTHOR or WP:NPROF. Charlie (talk) 02:47, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my comment. I agree with the nominator. SachinSwami (talk) 06:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scott D. Alldridge

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doing a Google search turned up more primary and sponsored sources, but it doesn't seem like there's sigcov for him or his companies and books. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Technology, and Oregon. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:35, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – [I've added two more citations to the page. I believe that with a bit more research, we can find additional reliable sources. Overall, the article looks good to me it's concise, non-promotional, and the information is supported by citations.] Black890 (talk) 21:31, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As @Lamona: pointed out the Deadlines seems like a copy of the MSN press release, so not aa new source. The podcast link and press release about his MBA also don't count as SIGCOV. There isn't a single reliable source on the page. BuySomeApples (talk) 17:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The MSN article and the Deadlines are the same article under two different bylines and the MSN byline links to this page of someone who claims to be a travel writer. I suspect a company-prepared press release. I am going to declare those two unreliable on this basis. The TechyNews gives no "about" and nothing to use to evaluate its reliability, and it seems to be a "kitchen sink" web site. The Healthcare IT news is the sound file of an interview (not independent). His book is listed on Amazon as "Publisher: Self Publisher". Lamona (talk) 23:49, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided. A source analysis would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel Asur

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Language problems may be why I can’t identify sources, but I’ve never before seen an article with entries in multiple language Wikipedias none of which are sourced, and I also note a number of self-published books. Doug Weller talk 18:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article should definitely not have been created directly in mainspace in this condition; it's completely unsourced, and I can't find any third-party sources on Google either. Needs to be either deleted or moved to draft where the creator can work on it. Bishonen | tålk 21:16, 28 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Doug Weller talk 18:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and Spain. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC there is at least one institute for the preservation or recovery of the Asturian language. It may be worth looking there for support. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 11:57, 29 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]
: Academy of the Asturian Language, Asur is a member. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:03, 29 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Keep I have found and added some sources, dating from 1986 to 2025 - easy to find by searching Google Scholar or Google Books. I do not read Spanish (or Asturian), so would need to copy and paste more into Google Translate in order to add more info and refs to the article - but there is certainly scholarly writing about his writing, so he meets WP:AUTHOR. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:30, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. Keep All the best: Rich Farmbrough 08:21, 3 June 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, WormEater13 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 5 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sharif Malikah

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing to establish notability—citations appear to be non-notable news websites. M.A.Spinn (talk) 22:41, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Poetry, Medicine, and Egypt. M.A.Spinn (talk) 22:41, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it looks to me like the author is probably notable, but that the transliteration of his name, also spelled "Sherif Meleka" and other ways! is giving us issues. His novel Suleiman's Ring is reviewed I think here[13](I don't have access), here[14](last page) and here[15]. --Jahaza (talk) 23:21, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully someone can search in Arabic? The Yale University library, among other places seem to be collecting his books[16].Jahaza (talk) 23:48, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first point re: the reception of his novel seems worth a double check. Given that Yale has 14.9 million volumes in its holdings however I do not think that is sufficient to establish notability. M.A.Spinn (talk) 23:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadspike [Talk] 22:43, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jahaza Have you come to a conclusion on Malikah's notability? Toadspike [Talk] 22:43, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 02:39, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Syed Shah Israil

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article fails to meet the notability guidelines as outlined in WP:N. The subject is not the focus of any significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. The few mentions that do exist are passing and do not provide the depth of material necessary to support a standalone article. Most of the sources cited are either not about the subject or use it only as a brief example without substantial analysis or dedicated discussion. Given the lack of notability and meaningful coverage, the article does not justify its own space. Deletion or merging into a broader, more relevant topic (if applicable) would be more appropriate. Retaining it in its current state risks violating Wikipedia’s standards. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 May 23, Bangladesh, India and Islam. Jaunpurzada (talk) 21:15, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Jaunpurzada (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - both the context and sourcing doesn't explain why he's notable. Where are the reviews of his works? Where are the compendiums or other collections? Bearian (talk) 01:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Sylhetis#Other languages. The deepest source is a single paragraph, half of which is about who he was descended from, about his uncle, and about one of his sons. The remainder is just two sentences: "[Syed Israil] was a sufi saint well known for his high proficiency in Arabic and Persian. He was also known as the Malek-ul-Ulama, well-versed in both Arabic and Persian: he wrote Madanul Fauaed in Persian in 914 Hijri." The other sources manage to cover the same ground in one sentence each. Because of the absence of significant coverage, this shouldn't be a stand alone article. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:32, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Authors proposed deletions

Nazareth Hassan (via WP:PROD on 9 October 2023)

[Infobae_2021_allegation-1] "La youtuber Maire Wink acusó a Ricardo Ponce de crear una secta y abusar sexualmente de mujeres". Infobae (in Spanish). 2021-05-29. Archived from the original on 2021-05-30.

[Martinez_2021_investigation-2] Martinez, Rafael (2021-06-03). "Catean hotel en Bacalar tras denuncias de abuso sexual en contra de Ricardo Ponce". El Sol de México (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2025-06-12.

[Siglo_2021_investigation-3] "Indagan denuncias de abuso contra gurú Ricardo Ponce en Quintana Roo". El Siglo de Torreón (in Spanish). 2021-06-03. Archived from the original on 2024-05-04.

[Pérez_2021_investigation-4] Pérez, Jazive (2021-06-03). "Del paraíso al infierno del abuso sexual: Revelaciones en un grupo de autosanación en México" (in Spanish). KVEA. Archived from the original on 2021-06-04.

[Proceso_2021_response-5] Omar Fierro, Juan (2021-06-14). "Ricardo Ponce, el 'gurú de la autosanación', pide no ser crucificado tras denuncia de abuso sexual". Proceso (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2021-06-14.

[Telemundo_2021_response-6] 
"Expareja de Ricardo Ponce responde a las acusaciones de abuso sexual en contra del conferencista". Hoy Día (in Spanish). Telemundo. 2021-06-08. Archived from the original on 2021-06-08.
"Ricardo Ponce se defiende de las acusaciones de abuso sexual y dice que son 'un montaje'". Hoy Día (in Spanish). 2021-10-15. Telemundo. Archived from the original on 2025-06-12.

[7] "Expareja de Ricardo Ponce responde a las acusaciones de abuso sexual en contra del conferencista". Hoy Día (in Spanish). Telemundo. 2021-06-08. Archived from the original on 2021-06-08.

[8] "Ricardo Ponce se defiende de las acusaciones de abuso sexual y dice que son 'un montaje'". Hoy Día (in Spanish). 2021-10-15. Telemundo. Archived from the original on 2025-06-12.

[Chávez_2025-7] Chávez M, Javier (2025-02-05). "Marianne Gonzaga: ¿Quién es la influencer que fue detenida por apuñalar a la novia de su ex pareja?". Milenio (in Spanish). Archived from the original on 2025-02-06.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]