Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Meade

: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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_preload&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Peter Meade}}&preloadparams%5b%5d={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Meade}}&editintro=Wikipedia%3AXFDcloser%2FSoft_deletion_refund_intro&preloadtitle={{urlencode:Peter Meade}}§ion=new&title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_undeletion&create=Request request the article's undeletion]. Daniel (talk) 23:08, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

=[[:Peter Meade]]=

:{{la|Peter Meade}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Peter Meade}})

No evidence of notability. A couple of routine mentions in business news don't automatically make a person eligible for an encyclopaedia article. — kashmīrī ^TALK 11:35, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:03, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Delete as failing WP:GNG. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 16:27, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

: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.