Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dean Finch

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. ✗plicit 04:59, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dean Finch[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)

Doesn't pass WP:NBIO. All sources are either of dubious intellectual independence, do not provide in-depth biographical coverage, or both. Ovinus (talk) 20:55, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Ovinus (talk) 20:55, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:12, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Editors should not be nominating articles for deletion unless they are familiar with WP:BEFORE, and make a modicum of effort to see what might not be in the article. The most cursory search for "Dean Finch Persimmon" shows several quality sources, as does "Dean Finch National Express". He is the CEO of a FTSE100 company and was the CEO of a FTSE250 one for ten years. Such people are almost always notable. Edwardx (talk) 21:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Edwardx: I did conduct a BEFORE search, and could not find reliable articles which are both intellectually independent (e.g., by not being mostly based on interviews) and provide in-depth biographical (i.e., not focused on the company) coverage, as required for notability. If you could give some convincing examples of that, I will withdraw this nomination. As to "such people are almost always notable", notability is not inherited and I'm not sure I agree. Ovinus (talk) 21:20, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Edwardx which would you say are the most significant independant sources to show notablity? Being CEO of any company doesn't make someone automatically notable. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:04, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this. Notability is not indicated. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 18:18, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:22, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I don't see how this person is notable based on the article as it is now. It's more like a resume than an article. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:15, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The current state of the article doesn't overly matter, it's more a case of do sources WP:NEXIST. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:04, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Does not meet WP:GNG. Alex-h (talk) 16:04, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Some coverage, but not seeing how it meets WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:06, 6 August 2022 (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.