Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Neal

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. lifebaka++ 15:49, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Mike Neal

Mike Neal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Procedural nom. I've declined a speedy request on this as I think there's enough of an assertion of notability (founder of multiple listed corporations) there to stand, but I'm not convinced there's necessarily enough to warrant a WP article on him. Procedural nom so I abstain.  – iridescent 21:39, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

• Further note Special:Contributions/MonicaRMiller needs to be watched very carefully – while I am happy to stand up and say I don't think MyWikiBiz should ever have been banned, it's grossly hypocritical for MWB to be banned whilst allowing this kind of thing. – iridescent 22:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the declination of speedy, how is "founder of multiple listed corporations" an assertion of notability? I see no guideline like that on WP:BIO, although if there is such a guideline please do let me know.-Samuel Tan 08:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• WP:COMMON applies here. "Significant figure in multiple major corporations" implies "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded", quite aside from providing reasonable grounds to assume that, if true, reliable sources will exist. I wish all the deletionists and drive-by speedy taggers would actually read WP:CSD, in particular "to avoid speedy deletion an article does not have to prove that its subject is notable, just give a reasonable indication of why it might be notable". – iridescent 13:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Just want to clarify: (1) Are you saying that the criteria for inclusion of articles is that the article is significant, interesting, or unusual? I always thought the criterion was that spelled out in WP:N, which is based on sourcing, not on editor's opinions on the nature of the article itself. (2) Concerning the speedy, well, looks like this is a matter of different interpretations of the phrase "reasonable indication", so yup WP:AFD is the right place for this article to be *grin* -Samuel Tan 13:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

That's not a personal opinion of mine, that's a direct quote from the lead paragraph of WP:BIO. ("Within Wikipedia, notability is an inclusion criterion based on the encyclopedic suitability of an article topic. The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice"; that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." Notable in the sense of being "famous", or "popular" – although not irrelevant – is secondary.") – iridescent 14:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm *ponder* looks like we have different views regarding what WP:BIO is trying to say. How confusing. Anyway, I'll leave this mini-thread for now so the AFD procedure can get on. Cheers! -Samuel Tan 15:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep To provide grounds for keeping this entry, I'd like to provide additional detail as to why Mike Neal is notable. A quick google search of his name along with the companies he has founded will come up with a variety of significant references across business and trade press. Both companies he founded (DemandTec and SignalDemand) have considerably large, brand-name companies as clients: Cargill, Hormel, Safeway, Walmart, Office Depot, etc, which use Mike Neal's software to drive profits. His company SignalDemand is especially being recognized for its innovation in SaaS technology and for the work they are doing to combat food price volatility, an issue of global concern: BloggingStocks.com, Tom Taulli "SignalDemand: Using Math to Solve Food Problems". I would appreciate help editing this entry to meet wikipedia standards for inclusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MonicaRMiller (talk • contribs) 17:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment: MonicaRMiller is the author of the page (to disclose per WP:AFD#How to discuss an AfD)-Samuel Tan 07:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

strong delete - per WP:BIO and WP:BLP, possibly speedy delete. (1) The article right now is very poorly sourced. The citations are either non-secondary (company websites) or do not have Mike Neal as their subjects (patent pages). Per WP:BLP, "Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully." (2) I was not able to find reliable secondary sources that cover Mike Neal. Most online reliable sources (e.g. this site)cover mainly the companies he founded, which already have their own articles. -Samuel Tan 08:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight (talk) 14:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

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.