Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Paul H.J. Kim

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. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 01:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Paul H.J. Kim[edit]

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

Non-notable per WP:BIO, no significant coverage online from reliable sources per WP:RS. MuffledThud (talk) 20:11, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. —MuffledThud (talk) 20:12, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - nothing in this BLP reads shows any real notability. I'd change my mind if it can be verified by a reliable source that Kim is really an "elder", that such a position is equivalent to a bishop or archdeacon, and that his church actually has 3/4 million members. Otherwise, this is spam. Bearian (talk) 22:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete Even if he is an "elder" in a large church that means nothing. I am an elder in my church but that doesn't make me notable. Base the decision on his business career, or lack of it, which I am not competent to judge. In any case, if keeping, change the name of the article. "Dr." has no place in article titles, it should be simply "Paul H.J. Kim". --MelanieN (talk) 03:09, 12 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

P.S. Reading his article, I can find no justification for calling him "Dr." in the first place. He has a B.A. degree and a J.D. degree. Lawyers, even with a J.D. degree, are not generally referred to as "Dr." --MelanieN (talk) 16:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

By the way, while we are evaluating this page for deletion, we should also evaluate the similar page for his business partner, Ken Eldred (linked from Kim's page). Eldred also seems non-notable. He is cited for founding companies similar to those on the Kim page and for his religious activities. The two articles are so similar and so closely related that the same decision should be made for both IMO. I'm not going to Nominate For Deletion because I'm not skilled at that stuff, but I suggest someone else do it - and link the two discussions. --MelanieN (talk) 16:10, 12 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[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.