Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John D. Roush

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. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 19:45, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14 times over the last 10 years this article was anonymously vandalized. Several months ago it was proposed for deletion rather than being updated (prior referenced articles/sources to other websites had moved, so source links were no longer valid - not a good reason to just delete the majority of the content and then the article. So sad. I am happy to spend the time to re-source the supporting content to get this article back to its prior of being about technology and contributions instead of looking like an online resume. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TechHistoryPro (talk • contribs) 03:17, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

John D. Roush[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 person does not appear to have significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The article before today was a clear resume, which Wikipedia is WP:NOT for. Izno (talk) 17:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Izno (talk) 17:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Izno (talk) 17:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify He is notable, but article needs to be rewritten. Kamran Ali El-Batli (talk) 17:33, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Elbatli, Just going to point out that draftifying a 14 year old article is essentially just deleting it. WP:DRAFTIFY makes clear that draftification is not a backdoor to deletion. Curbon7 (talk) 19:02, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I see that almost all text on the page was deleted before the nomination. -GorgonaJS (talk) 21:44, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; Not enough independent coverage to justify notability of individual, article had zero content other than resume material. (WP:NOTWEBHOST) A Google search of the individual only brings up information about him as an IBM employee. Theknine2 (talk) 07:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 03:12, 23 September 2021 (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.