Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William "Bill" Douglass

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

William "Bill" Douglass[edit]

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

Autobiographical article that I do not believe meets WP:BIO. However, I could use a second opinion, hence the AfD rather than a PROD. Singularity42 (talk) 18:45, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have also added the following article, also written by the same author. They are relatives involved in the same company. I would think their notability is tied into each other. Singularity42 (talk) 18:52, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brad Douglass (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Keep – With a possible Merge/redirect to Douglass Distribution. There is enough coverage for either the owner Mr. Douglass or the company, Douglass Distribution, as shown here [1], to warrant inclusion here at Wikipedia. Notability is established with 3rd party – creditable – verifiable - independent sources, which have been shown above. Thanks. ShoesssS ^Talk 19:12, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and cleanup per User:Shoessss. Pburka (talk) 19:48, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:57, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep but don't redirect to any of the company articles, I don't believe the companies themselves are notable enough for their own articles, keep all at the persons article and have strong words with the author about COI and AUTO. SGGH ^ping! 21:06, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment An article on the company Douglass Distributing has been re-created. Nothing much offered yet in the way of sources for any of these. The presumed conflict of interest is a concern, and is bound to influence both content and tone, at least subtly, in the direction of self-promotion. If these articles are kept one hopes they will be rewritten by objective contributors with reliable sources. 99.155.206.57 (talk) 22:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has now been deleted for the third time. The author just keeps copying the "About Us" from the company's website, and keeps ignoring admin warnings about copyright issues. So at the moment, there's no article to redirect to... Singularity42 (talk) 04:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I’ll take care of it and get a stub going later today. I’ll drop a note on the author’s page and see if I can explain the problem regarding copyright violation. ShoesssS ^Talk 12:29, 29 December 2009 (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.