Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Smith (Motorola engineer)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. AfD is not for cleanup... Randykitty (talk) 17:36, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Smith (Motorola engineer)[edit]

Bill Smith (Motorola engineer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very poorly written with rampant grammatical errors. Very little of this article pertains to its subject at all; style is promotional and littered with weasel words. Much of the very basic information (When did he start working for Motorola? When did he develop Six Sigma?) blatantly contradicts the Six Sigma article. Chimneyrock (talk) 22:27, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT TrainTalk 06:47, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:51, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Six Sigma is a really important philosophy. They use to teach it to us in Business School. So I am pretty sure this guy is highly cited. I think that gets him by based on WP:ACADEMIC.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:39, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, developed 6 sigma, highly notable. Szzuk (talk) 14:14, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Obviously notable as inventor of Six Sigma, and has the sources to back that up. The article's badly written and needs some serious editorial love, but that's not a reason to delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:54, 5 May 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.