Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Johnson (software engineer)

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. Missvain (talk) 00:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Johnson (software engineer)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No evidence nor claim of notability. Negligible biographical content. WP:BEFORE shows no evidence of notability either. Original version was sourced to Medium, Reddit, crypto blogs. Declined PROD, but without any remedy to the problems. David Gerard (talk) 00:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 00:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The subject is the creator of the Ethereum Name Service (ENS). There is currently a draft for ENS which was submitted and then declined due to a lack of reliable sources. Even if an article for the Ethereum Name Service is ever accepted, it is unlikely that its creator will himself be notable unless by some other means. As for the interview about the Y2K bug, there is no evidence that his solution was significant in solving the problem, especially as he never actually released his proposed solution so far as I can tell.―NK1406 ^{talk•contribs} 00:18, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In your original request for deletion, you said "Original version was sourced to Medium, Reddit, crypto blogs." In fact, this article doesn't cite Medium, Reddit, or crypto blogs. You wrote: "Declined PROD, but without any remedy to the problems." But in fact the problems you cited didn't exist. Re whether Nick Johnson is notable enough to have an article, being the creator of an open source protocol that is well-known and respected in his industry makes him notable. He has also been listed as one of the most influential people in the Ethereum ecosystem. Bcmillegan (talk) 00:58, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The original version of the article did, but not the version at the time of the PROD. This should be clear from me saying that I was talking about the original version - that is, this was never a well-sourced article. The problem is that it's ill-sourced and not up to any notability standard, let alone BLP rules. Do you have sufficient sources for your article to demonstrate notability? - David Gerard (talk) 14:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Kolma8 (talk) 13:56, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not mentioned in source. 122.60.173.107 (talk) 08:27, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with the nomination: No evidence nor claim of notability. Sources don't meet WP:RS and fails WP:BASIC Sneakerheadguy (talk) 21:58, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE: fails BASIC The Ace in Spades (talk) 12:05, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — Both the quality and quantity of sources create a weak case for notability. ^Hidden_Lemon _/^{/ talk} 18:52, 15 December 2020 (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.