Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neil Willmett (Australian businessman)

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. J04n(talk page) 13:32, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Willmett (Australian businessman)[edit]

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

fails WP:BIO. also WP:AUTOBIO and WP:NOTRESUME. looks suspiciously self promotion with many grand claims uncited in article. 3 gnews hits says something [1] around significant coverage. LibStar (talk) 05:15, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep with cleanup for promotional tone, on strength of coverage in The Daily Telegraph as "first published Aboriginal business author." — Brianhe (talk) 07:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

simply being the first published Aboriginal business author is not enough for notability. He lacks significant third party coverage. LibStar (talk) 07:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Similar coverage in Courier-Mail ... seems to meet strict WP:AUTHOR criterion of multiple independent reviews. – Brianhe (talk) 07:37, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Courier Mail is the same publisher as Daily Telegraph. LibStar (talk) 07:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 20:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 00:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:12, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. He's just another accomplished person. He's energetic and able and has a nice smile and has built himself a nice career, like many many millions of other people. And that's it. The one thing that he could possibly hang notability on is that he wrote a book. But its a technical how-to book on a narrow subject. He is not a notable author. As the rest, really. He managed this project, he participated in that conference, he took this course, he gave consulting services to that group. There is nothing there. If he rates an article, half the people in my town rate articles. They have nice careers too. Looks like vanity, spam, and cruft to me. Herostratus (talk) 15:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom and Herostratus. --Russavia ^{I'm chanting as we speak} 15:40, 15 February 2011 (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.