Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Johnson (technologist)

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. Sources presented presented have shown the article to fit the criteria of the general notability guideline, namely, significant coverage in reliable sources. Noting the one delete !vote on this AFD is actually from the nominator, hence the reason for myself closing this nomination. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 00:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Johnson (technologist)[edit]

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

No independent references in > a year. no claim to nobility. web search reveals no significant covreage. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:20, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There isn't a lot of web coverage because he's old-school. Published a book (already in article, though the two other books on Amazon under the author name appear to be by somebody else), and is cited in at least two different InfoWorld (not a general purpose periodical, but influential at the time) articles, about the launch of AMD's 29K and early x86 CPUs, respectively. I will see if I can't beef it up a bit with the two links I provided. Edwin Herdman (talk) 06:11, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — -- Cirt (talk) 16:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 14:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:04, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep at least one more try is worth it to verify some of the info. I did a quick lookup on IEEE and found a couple papers. It is difficult to make sure it is the same person with such a common name, but both the 29K and K5/K6 projects were fairly historical. Certainly the article needs to be reworded to be less than a resume blurb and more encyclopedic. W Nowicki (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I added the InfoWorlds, but also ran into a William Michael Johnson baseball player born in 1980, and a convicted murderer in Texas of that name among others. Will keep looking. W Nowicki (talk) 17:31, 20 June 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, v/r - T P 22:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can add that with one round of research I found 11 references, and there are probably more. His good quote about the x86 was repeated by several other sources. I was confused a bit because a Mark Johnson also worked with the same Stanford Professor about the same time on a related project. W Nowicki (talk) 16:06, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I, too, found the October 1995 InfoWorld article here where he responds to delays in the AMD K5 project. That's enough, but there are more in other issues of the same periodical. Binksternet (talk) 06:25, 26 June 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, MacMed^talk _stalk 02:08, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sources appear to meet GNG, kudos to W Nowicki for adding sources and other improvements to the article.. --joe decker ^{talk to me} 16:01, 8 July 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.