Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephane Vlachos

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:18, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stephane Vlachos[edit]

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

Stephane Marc Vlachos was deleted earlier today, but I’m on the fence about whether to request speedy deletion for this, so I thought I'd discuss, in a sense, whether this qualifies for speedy. There are a fair number of reasonable references to him as inventor (or an inventor) of the electronic cigarette. This article leaves it at “one of the first, if not the very first, contributor to the invention.” However, the currently popular device, the one that reached the market, is based on an ultrasonic-based technology developed by Hon Lik, distinct from the heat-based method used by Vlachos. So Vlachos may have created an electronic cigarette, but not the type of electronic cigarette that has gone into production, and I don’t know if the article can rightfully say that he contributed to the one now being sold. In that case, he’s “notable” for having his name mentioned in articles presenting the history of the e-cigarette, but not for having had a role in creating the actual e-cigarette on the market today.

Further, I find no references to him in connection with cigarettes earlier than November 28, 2011 (though I don’t know where Google gets that date, since it’s not in the article)[1]. It’s almost as though there are now attempts to retrofit him artificially into the history of the present e-cigarette. That earliest article (the source, in French, for the information I presented above) mentions that Hon Lik filed for a patent from the World Intellectual Property Organization in 2005; it seems that an application from Vlachos was under consideration at the time the article was written.

Can significance be deemed to be implied by an article based on mentions of its subject's failure to achieve note? Should I have A7ed this? —Largo Plazo (talk) 14:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My humble analysis of the sources I found for this guy:

http://www.mishpacha.com/Browse/Article/2315/Clearing-the-Smoke - Authored article by a seemingly reputable magazine (Mishpacha)
http://www.prlog.org/12214272-who-really-invented-the-electronic-cigarette.html - Press release on a press release site. Anonymous author whose email ends in ecinventor.com and is from France (conflict of interest it seems, may even be Stephane himself!) ecinventor.com is a placeholder "this domain is registered" page with no further info.
https://www.facebook.com/ElectronicCigare/posts/1420125941544011 - Facebook post by a page called "Electronic cigarette". Obviously this is not usable as a source but it does mention "If you are interested to hear more about this story or support this inventor, just drop an email to [email protected]". (The person at that email might have other sources if we ask them... assuming good faith here.)
Going to ecmuseum.com redirects to http://ecmuseum.jimdo.com/, an apparently self published site that has the text of the press release from number 2 and a link to the press release.
http://www.vapclub.fr/content/11-la-cigarette-electronique-c-est-quoi (mentioned by Largo above) - Lots of text, but if you scroll to the bottom you see that the source is French Wikipedia's article fr:Cigarette électronique. We shouldn't cite a source that cites Wikipedia. Furthermore, on FrWiki talk page for that article there's this:

Invention Vlachos ?
J'ai supprimé [2] l'assertion non sourcée d'une invention en 2001 par étudiant français Vlachos. Je ne trouve rien sur Internet, sinon des copies de Wikipédia. En plus la ligne « Cette invention est en cours de reconnaissance par l'OMPI. » est vraiment louche... J'imagine un canular. En tout cas, pas de source sérieuse, pas de wikipédia !
-- Irønie (d) 29 mai 2013 à 15:31 (CEST)

Translation by me with assistance from Google:

Vlachos invention?
I deleted [3] the unsourced assertion of invention in 2001 by French student Vlachos. I can not find anything on the Internet, besides copies of Wikipedia. In addition, the line "This invention is being recognized by WIPO." is really fishy ... I suspect a hoax. In any case, without a serious source, don't add it to Wikipedia!
- Irønie (d) May 29, 2013 at 15:31 (CEST)

TL;DR: I only found one reliable-looking source about this guy. -- Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 15:31, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:33, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:33, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete When someone issues a Press Release that they are the inventor of a technology, that is potentially worth billions in patents, you can bet we will require a high level of verification to avoid Wikipedia being used. One journalistic source Mishpacha is not enough to verify a legitimate claim nor notability. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 17:04, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as per nom and Cardamon. The inventor may not become notable just because the invention itself is notable (WP:Notability is not inherited) Moreover, even if it can be proven that he was an contributing inventor, a mention at Electronic cigarette would be sufficient. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 23:45, 15 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.