Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Pfeiffer

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. —Cryptic 18:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Pfeiffer

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page or group of pages is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

Ben Pfeiffer (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This article has been nominated for speedy deletion. As I'm uncomfortable with carrying out this deletion speedily, I've listed the article here. No vote. --Scimitar 20:10, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete: I am unable to find much to establish notability other than his presidency of a company that does not itself seem to meet the notability requirements. On a side note, article creation is suspiciously similar to other articles by fellow contributors to a non-notable Search Engine Optimization conference series. ju66l3r 20:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Please find comments listed on talk page for Ben Pfeiffer. He has been pioneer of industry since 1998 like many listed on the search engine optimization consultants category. It is a relatively new industry, so not as widely known, making notability a matter of subjective opinion and more difficult to establish for anyone.Orioncountry 20:31, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• I'm not in agreement with the notability of quite a few of the SEO consultants in that category as I probe further. The existence or age of other articles is not a meter for whether another article meets the criteria for WP though. Furthermore, someone who just joined the SEO profession, but had an immediate notable impact would warrant an article, while someone else who has been there for years does not. Notability is not subjective, please point where this article meets WP:BIO. ju66l3r 20:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete per WP:CSD G11. This is pretty blatant advertising. Searching both Ben Pfeiffer and Ranksmart produced very little results. Heck, Google thought I was making a mistake and asked if I meant Rinksmart. Lankybugger 20:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

This is not advertising in anyway. Please see comments on orginal talk page. Try your search again Benjamin Pfeiffer and Rank SmartOrioncountry 20:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I did, Orion. It's generally a pretty bad sign for the notability of a company when you start coming across unrelated pages five entries into the google search. Please see WP:NOTE which details the basic criterea for notability. Lankybugger 21:00, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. A better search might be this. I still maintain that this article should go through AfD as opposed to speedy deletion; the article isn't written in a spammy manner. --Scimitar 20:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I tried to follow guidelines as best possible. As for the searches, even as a search marketer, I nor anyone else has control as to how those pages are organized in the search results. Many people who have pages on here, also have poor searches for their name or company.Orioncountry 21:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Which would be grounds for their exclusion instead of grounds for the inclusion of this article. "Other articles are just like this one" is not a valid reason for keeping an article. Lankybugger 21:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't state it was a reason for inclusion, you stated it was a reason for exclusion in your comments before. If you exclude this article, then you might as well exclude all the rest that don't stand up to Wikipedia criteria because that would be in the fair unbiased nature of this site. I recommend doing additional research into the search marketing community before many decisions about this article or another one that is being contested.Orioncountry 21:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete or Speedy per nom Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 03:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

  I am not aware that this person has ever spoken at a major conference, published a book or article, or been the subject of a news story. There simply don't seem to be any independent sources of info about the subject, so there is no way to write a proper article. This does not reflect negatively on the subject or his accomplishments. He simply isn't notable. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 19:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. You should have speedied it. There is no assertion of notability anywhere - Anyone can be President of a corporation. Ohconfucius 05:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete There's very little content, and we are doing no harm to a newbie. Considering the industry, it will easily be able to recreate the article when and if there is any content. Certainly not speedy, but then I think that notability should be removed as a speedy criterion, for reasons explained on the talk page there. The discussion here is further proof that notability is always clarified by a discussion. DGG 04:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Need sources Jeh? Major Search Conference at WebProNews (validated source as indicated on other biographies talk pages), Search Engine Land, Co-host of regular show on WebmasterRadio.fm, Executive Board and Charter Member of SMA-NA, Senior Editor of Search Engine Roundtable (award winning blog), Recommended Among Industry Experts SEOmoz.org, SES Conference Coverage, Example Articles.70.112.103.54 18:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hi 70.112.103.54, and welcome. You may want to create an account and/or login. That would tend to give your opinion in this discussion more weight, at least in my opinion. Thanks for the sources. Any reliable sources should be added to the article. What you've mentioned above doesn't seem to rise to the necessary level of notability, but you may want to check WP:BIO for the exact criteria. If you present a strong case, I will reconsider my opinion. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 14:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• delete. BuickCenturyDriver 02:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete this seems borderline advertising with the company (especially since it hasn't been sourced). The article did not assess any notability with him, and I doubt it could be other than his job position. --Адам12901 ^Talk 19:52, 10 January 2007 (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.