Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Sampson

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 delete. No prejudice towards redirection. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:23, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Sampson[edit]

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

Article topic is not the subject of significant coverage from reliable, independent sources. (?) There are sources for Aurous (website), one of his creators, so a redirect there would be acceptable. Otherwise, the sources currently in the article are mostly primary sources and there was nothing extra about the individual in a search of major tech sources. Again, a redirect to Aurous (website) would be fine—it was just reverted by an IP SPA twice. czar 13:53, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and Redirect - It might be also wise to protect the redirect for some time (a few months?) to block recreating this article. Just in case. I do not think there is much to preserve as the sources are very bad. WP:PRESERVE. Ceosad (talk) 16:54, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as there's nothing at all to even suggest minimal notability and improvement. SwisterTwister talk 06:20, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Software engineer who lacks significant coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:29, 20 December 2015 (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.