Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Solvik (2nd nomination)

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 keep. Joyous! Noise! 00:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Solvik

AfDs for this article:

[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)

BLP previously kept at AfD in 2008, but does not seem to have accrued any more RIS in the fifteen years since then. Being CIO of Cisco seemed to clinch it back in 2008 but though the subject has held senior positions I can see nothing at all in depth about him. Mccapra (talk) 00:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America. Mccapra (talk) 00:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I was all set to say "wikipedia is not linkedin!" and !vote delete but this guy is probably more notable today than he was in 2008. I'd love an in-depth profile of his entire life, but there's definitely a lot about his business life to be found. I've done some reworking and adding to the article.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 15:39, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks those are improvements but I’m not sufficiently convinced of his notability to withdraw the nomination. Mccapra (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK, i only spent a little time on it. It can only (hopefully) get even better during this AfD discussion.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 21:12, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in light of improvements. Easily satisfies WP:GNG. There is enough in the article now to justify keeping it, both in terms of sourcing and content, including a notability argument. Of course, there is still room for improvement and expansion; a Wikipedia Library quick search yields 132 hits, many of which look promising in terms of offering additional information which could be incorporated into the article. Cielquiparle (talk) 10:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The LA Times and WSJ articles are enough to establish notability. The interviews and shorter articles don't detract from that. Admittedly, there is very little biographical information so all we know about is his work. I think that's the nature of the tech world; if he were an artist, for example, some journalist would want to know more about him as a person. Lamona (talk) 16:38, 5 March 2023 (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.