Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Kennedy (programmer)

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 merge to CPAN. Closing as a merge and redirect. Looks like the subject just isn't passing our requirements just yet for his own article. Missvain (talk) 16:17, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Kennedy (programmer)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is a procedural nomination requested by 155.143.16.103 (talk · contribs). The nomination rationale is "Every open source contributor does not require an article". I am neutral Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:54, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:09, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:09, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:17, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Nominated before in 2009, WP:Articles for deletion/Adam Kennedy (Programmer). Mattg82 (talk) 20:33, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to CPAN, new section Notable people. There would seem to be no doubt that the subject is important and "notable" within the Perl community, and is a likely search term, but I cannot find sufficient to satisfy GNG. More than half the current article is about "Perl stuff", so trim and merge the article to a new section in CPAN. Aoziwe (talk) 22:43, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I would claim that Adam's work is as significant as Damian Conway, another Australian active in the Perl community with a Wiki page. Adam's recent work at Kaggle and now at Apple are significant and in addition to his open source contributions. This level of achievement is fairly uncommon for Australian IT people, and worthy of note. Happy to expand article if needed. Teraplane (talk) 08:54, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you could provide a few of the new references you would use to expand the article, you might get me to change my !vote. I did not recognise any that might bolster up a GNG claim, but then I might not have looked sufficiently. Aoziwe (talk) 09:47, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, have expanded recent career section, which is not Perl focused. Teraplane (talk) 23:44, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but that was not much at all? And, importantly, speaker bios are normally provided by the speaker to the seminar? So hardly IRS? Aoziwe (talk) 06:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I could find, maybe it's not enough. However, article depth is similar to Adam's peers such as Brian_d_foy, chromatic etc with no AfDs for them. So feel it's appropriate on that basis. As the link I added states, he can’t talk about much of his work as it's propreitary. So someone in this position won't have alot of material about him on the web. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teraplane (talk • contribs) 06:59, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Encouraging another round of participation by Wikipedians. Thanks!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to CPAN, new section Notable people. I concur with the reasoning presented by Aoziwe. Most content on him is in technical documentation or self-published, but he is also referred to as making a notable contribution in scholarly writings here Perl Cannot Be Parsed: A Formal Proof which shows some notability in this narrow group.--23mason (talk) 14:31, 29 January 2020 (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.