Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth B. Marlin

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth B. Marlin[edit]

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

Does not meet notability criteria. Although mentioned in several articles, has not been the subject of any non-trivial, third-party, reliable sources. Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 13:20, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Although I believe this investment banker may be notable, the current article is largely a copyright violation of his executive profile on Bloomberg Businessweek. Cullen328 (talk) 15:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the position is notable , and there are references to support it. We normally do accept business executives at this level as notable, based if necessary on common sense. In this field there is normally not substantial independent bios except for the most famous, so we accept well-supported indications of being notable within their profession. The GNG as written is applicable perhaps to public performers, but not to every type of article. To see the available material, use the page history--I just removed the bulk of the text because it was indeed a copyvio, but it can undoubtedly be rewritten. fwiw, I deleted articles for two of the lower level executives of the firm, written by the same person in the same style, because I judged them entirely promotional, and not worth the rewriting, because there wouldn't be a realistic chance of accepting them as notable . DGG ( talk ) 16:44, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

it was pointed out to me on my talk p. that the first sentence was also a copyvio. I rewrote it more briefly--it was in any case 50% jargon, a good illustration of why PR copy does not make an acceptable Wikipedia article, even should it gets licensed. DGG ( talk ) 19:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:45, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The sources don't show any indication of notability! Perchloric (talk) 16:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 06:55, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can find no significant achievement by the subject that would establish notability. I am sure he is fine gentleman, but in the end he is, like most of us, a person with a job. Rotmo (talk) 08:20, 5 March 2011 (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.