Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Nick Garrett, Jr.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was delete. Johnleemk | Talk 12:45, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable bio for founder and CEO of apparently non-notable corporation (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nick_Garrett_Development,_Inc.).-- PeruvianLlama(spit) 22:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete--Samuel J. Howard 13:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep(see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nick_Garrett_Development,_Inc.).-- Yater 18:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment This seems like a borderline case. . .He has been featured on the cover of a local magazine, which is a reasonable basis for a claim to notability. My problem is that this feel like vanity. Perhaps the creator can shed some light. . .is he the subject or related to the subject? Neutral for now. TMS63112 22:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Should it matter whether he was on the cover of a magazine or not? Is the claim of notability even a real issue? (It's a Guideline not a Policy) To answer the question, I am not related to the subject, though I do know him. Should that even matter? If I wanted to put up an article on my grandfather's story of being 18 yrs old in Europe at the end of WWII, who most wikipedians would aggree does not meet the Notability requirement, who is to say that it is not a worthwhile entry? After reading Jimmy Wale's personal appeal for donations to Wikipedia, where he suggests the purpose of Wiki is "to freely share clear, factual, unbiased information...", I think we can all make the world a better place if we just step back and please don't bite the newcomers. Yater 06:39, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Although WP:BIO is a guideline, not a policy, it has pretty wide acceptance and is regularly used as a criteria on AfD. It is my primary criteria when participating in AfD discussions. One problem with inlcuding non-notable people is that the information is hard to verify. Also, it can be difficult to write about someone you are related to from a neutral point of view (hence the vanity guildeline). A lot of people try to use wiki to advertise their companies and that is not what wikipedia is about. I can see how this discussion would feel like biting a newcomer to you. That is certainly not what we intend to do. Please don't take it personally, and continue to contribute! TMS63112 16:53, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as non-notable. Stifle 09:41, 13 January 2006 (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.