Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Baron (2nd nomination)
- 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 Keep Merged Although the first AfD outcome was keep, that was in 2006. Our standards for BLPs have moved since then. There is little to say about this person outside of what is or could be said in the Rocketboom article. and except for Gnangarra's argument, the rest of the commenters feel a merge is appropriate. Hence, merge. But even absent a delete consensus, the right thing to do with BLPs is to not have them unless there is a clear consensus for keep. ++Lar: t/c 17:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Andrew Baron[edit]
- Andrew Baron (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Article was merged into Rocketboom on 11 March after no objections were made on the talk page for several months. Intent was to remove this article after the merge; I am posting here for guidance and consensus. What little remains of the article (in current stub state) lacks references (I tried). Although Baron has produced a notable work (Rocketboom) there seems to be no independent, verifiable information about him personally outside of his work on that (very) notable project. Recommend deleting due to merge into Rocketboom, WP:V and WP:BIO (due to lack of sources relating to Baron personally). -Cleanr (talk) 18:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Merge per my nom. Cleanr (talk) 18:24, 14 April 2008 (UTC) Update: agreed, my proposal involves the merge/redirect. No reason to delete the article and/or history. Cleanr (talk) 01:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]- Keep merged. This may not be appropriate for AFD; among other things, merge and delete is a potential GFDL violation. In any case, it should redirect there as a search term. --Dhartung | Talk 18:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep merged per Dhartung. There's no reason to scrub it unless there are gross violations, libel, slander, etc . Celarnor Talk to me 18:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep IMHO there is enough independent information to warrant an article VoABot II reverted content that was sourced from WP:RS and relevant diff on the day prior to the afd nomination. Also there isnt a section in Rocketboom about its creator so as merge doesnt appear to have occurred yet. Gnangarra 13:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Those articles discuss Rocketboom and make only a brief mention of Baron as producer. The sources referenced were added to the Rocketboom article in March but there's little biographical info to pull. I'd invite people to help on the Rocketboom page. Cleanr (talk) 01:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There is information relevant to the Bio and the Rollingstone source [1] isnt in the Rocketboom article the merge occurred at 21:19 UTC March 11 [2] and was then removed in the next edit at 21:32 diff, the next edit on March 21 removed the remaining content from the merge [3]. Obviously from this series of edits, the editors consensus is that the information shouldnt be in the Rocketboom article. The question then is, Is there sufficient information and notability for a separate article? The subject is the founder of a company that is notable, there are multiple independent sources about the subject, as such the subject meets the criteria of WP:N and WP:BLP. Gnangarra 05:00, 18 April 2008 (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.