Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Natbony

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) 14:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

William Natbony[edit]

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

person of questionable notability, part of a series of articles created by this same editor and his obvious sockpuppet WuhWuzDat 15:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, non-notable person being spammed by suspected sockmaster. --SquidSK ^(1MC^•^log) 15:46, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article is badly written, reads like a CV rather than an encyclopedia article, but the subject is notable enough to be quoted as a source in Money and Forbes. --MelanieN (talk) 07:24, 15 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable. Being quoted by Forbed isn't proof of notability: that would require the article be able him (for example). To pass WP:BIO, he'd need multiple non-trivial reliable sources. Being quoted is a good example of a trivial mention. Bfigura ^(talk) 01:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bfigura's argument above.
Delete. I've been through the Gnews hits and don't see anything there that amounts to substantial coverage. He is certainly quoted several times, but as Bfigura says these are textbook "trivial" mentions, and other single-sentence references don't, I think, carry enough weight individually or jointly to meet the notability criteria. Weirdly it looks like he has a better shot at notability in a former incarnation as a junior chess and bridge champion, assuming it's the same guy. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:53, 16 December 2009 (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.