Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Cannella

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. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 18:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Cannella[edit]

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

He might be notable, but there is no reason to trust People as a proof of auch notability. ( If academic works on advertising were to say something similar, it might be taken seriously.) The rest of the sources are even less reliable Further, this article is an advertisement: "Wisconsin Roots" is a heading that would only appear in a pr job, and the emphasis on "created several new long term positions" is about as trivial as I have ever seen here. The whole section on "community involvement" is the sort of good-will characteristic of advertisement. DGG ( talk ) 06:23, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I've cleaned up the worst of the prose and if possible, I'd recommend userfying this to User:Mark RBraff if it doesn't pass. I think that there is a weak claim of notability since I've found some sources that refer to him as a pioneer of infomercials. It's just that digging is a little slow going since most of his coverage has been before the Internet was really a thing. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:54, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Courcelles 15:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Courcelles 15:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. Courcelles 15:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the People and Harper articles establish notability, if not reliability. The Racine Journal Times articles cement it. WP:GNG met. Thanks to Tokyogirl79 for cleaning it up. 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 15:46, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I understand the concern about promotional content in this article, given that the subject is a person whose professional career has been dedicated to promotion. I do think the reference in People is relevant--when a large-circulation general-interest publication picks out an individual from a relatively obscure behind-the-scenes business sector for special mention as a pioneer, it can be taken as a legitimate marker of that person's notability. On the other hand it's only a short paragraph. But on balance I think there's enough out there to verify the subject's significance, and Tokyogirl79's edits have helped reduce the promo tone. Direct Marketing has a lengthy profile of him [1](HighBeam). --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:53, 26 November 2013 (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.