Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Boyd (computer engineer)

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. Courcelles (talk) 20:26, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Boyd (computer engineer)[edit]

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

The article has largely been written as, or as if it were, an autobiography, and also largely in a highly promotional tone, by single-purpose accounts, which are quite possibly the sockpuppets of the subject of the biographical article in question. The subject's notability even in the his own specific field of computing appears relatively obscure, perhaps just falling short of the general minimum threshold for the purpose of Wikipedia. There is a bereft of reliably-cited sources for the subject in the article, and the very existence in Wikipedia of a biographical article arguably gives the subject, who, as an otherwise relatively obscure British expatriate computer engineer in China in his 60s, much undue additional notability, certainly through the conduit of Google and also of Facebook. If anyone who had ever done any sort of work whatsoever directly or indirectly on or about MS-DOS or IBM PC-DOS back in the 1980s and 1990s deserved to have based upon that particular fact alone an article for himself on his own life here on Wikipedia, there would probably be tens if not hundreds of thousands of new articles herein. -- Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Urquhartnite (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: He is only mentioned in passing in the sources given (except for one trade news publication, which really doesn't confer notability), and his notability in general seems to be marginal at best. --Slashme (talk) 22:17, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:54, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete defintiely fails WP:BIO. also suspect AUTOBIO concerns. LibStar (talk) 05:23, 10 September 2015 (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.