Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Germann

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. Per analysis of proffered sources Spartaz ^Humbug! 15:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Germann

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

Beyond the puffery, this individual doesn't meet GNG or PROF (he has published a bit, not alot). Article is sourced to a Chicago Tribune piece by a community contributor (which is misrepresented in the lead as the Tribune's voice. Beyond that we have his huffpo author page, his linkedin page, pieces where he is mentioned in one line or a list, and pieces where he isn't mentioned at all. BEFORE shows he has given a few interviews, particularly recently, on various subjects (from a hurricane Irma short interview - [1], to interviews related to the aquarium) - however interviews do not confer notability, nor are there all that many of these. Icewhiz (talk) 09:04, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 09:05, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 09:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 09:07, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:31, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable as either an academic or a businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:37, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep article has some issue but there is plenty of substantial coverage in reliable independent sources as a Google News search shows. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:23, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@FloridaArmy: Please show an example of 2 independent, in-depth, reliable sources covering him. I failed to find such sources.Icewhiz (talk) 08:17, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The first four results in the search I libked above are all substantial coverage of this individual from the Tampa Bay Times Biz Journals and another Tampa Bay Times article months later. Those are just some examples. FloridaArmy (talk) 13:50, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google search results vary per location, google account, and time. Can you please provide links to actual articles? this one does have some coverage of him (though it is routine coverage as an appointment in a local paper). What I see in the biz journals are mainly interviews which would not establish notability.Icewhiz (talk) 14:17, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are the Tampa Bay Times, Biz Journals and other articles not showing up in your Google News reaults? What region are you located? That seems strange. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:41, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ordering varies according to where you are. They probably are in my search results - just further down - possibly several pages down (though I have seen some of the Tamp Bay Times articles in my BEFORE - I was not convinced they conveyed SIGCOV for this individual). If you are searching from a Florida IP (or near Florida) - they might be pushing these up for you.Icewhiz (talk) 15:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC) See - 7 Reasons Google Search Results Vary Dramatically - it's better to link to actual articles (or state their titles) over linking google search terms.Icewhiz (talk) 15:58, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. this is one. here's the BizJournals article. Here's a Crane's Chicago article on his involvement in the proposed Sports Museum. Here's an interview and video. There's also a Tampa Business Journal article about hime and more. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:03, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
1. [2] - seems like a press release on the appointment
2. [3] - interview with him, would not confer notability.
3. [4] - He's not the subject, and this is also an interview.
4. [5] - interview.Icewhiz (talk) 16:09, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The first two articles linked are absolutely not press releases. This is simply false. They are bylined articles. The Crane's piece is also an article. And interviews of the subject certainly do indicate that he is a prominent figure. And as Is said, these are just examples of the coverage.

There are more articles in the Chicago Tribune, Chicago Reader, Toledo Blade etc. FloridaArmy (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Chicago Tribune ref in the article is by a community contributor - not by the tribune staff. My understanding is that this is a blog or paid promotion.Icewhiz (talk) 19:43, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- a very puffed-up page, to the point that I suspect paid placement: other articles created by the same contributor. Beyond that, does not meet WP:ANYBIO. Being director of an aquarium is not sufficient to presume notability. Sources are passing mentions, not independent of the aquarium, and / or WP:SPIP. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:05, 3 February 2018 (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.