Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asko Makitalo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Punkmorten 10:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Asko Makitalo

I believe this article should be deleted due to lack of biographical notability. The article seems to claim significance in being listed in Who's Who's. I don't believe Mere listing in Who's Who warrants a wikipedia article. When I follow the link I am unable to find the subjects name. Regardless of verifiability, This article needs to explain what the subject did in order to get into Who's Who. If that information is already in the article then there is a strong case for deletion of this article. I also suspect this to be a vanity page. A google only revealed posts in forums. Zudduz 15:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete. Excluding the person's own posts on forums and his e-mail address which is firstname.surname@etc, he basically gets no Google hits. And even with all those unrelated and self-achieved hits, the count is at 52 (22 unique). The correct Finnish name is Mäkitalo, but that gives even less results. Besides, both Asko and Mäkitalo are common names in Finland. Who's Who claim is unverified and probably not notable enough on its own. Fails WP:BIO. Vanity CV. Prolog 15:41, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Surely he likes some privacy, and also due to SPAM it is wise. And most good places needs registration.From http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sukututkijat/messages gives the count88. Perhaps there are some Genealogists in Wiki, whom could give her opinion about that Genealogy aspect? (as soon as that capter is finaliazed)--Jack007 16:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Note: The above comment is by the article creator aka. Asko Mäkitalo himself [1]. Prolog 19:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. If genealogy has been your hobby since '02, how exactly did you get in Who's Who? Prolog 19:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment I believe the subject of the article is in Who's Who in Science and engineering --Zudduz 20:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak delete, looks more like vanity and personal spam than valuable encyclopedic content. bbx 07:00, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. I just noticed that WP:VAIN has a section on Who's Who and it goes like this: "Who's Who" directories and registries should be viewed critically as evidence of notability. These registries' criteria for listing are, as a rule, overinclusive and may be nonexistent -- some are vanity publishers and offer listing for a fee. The mere inclusion of a person in such a publication is therefore not sufficient to guarantee notability. Prolog 23:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Reply. The real Margues book, never take fee. Description about this very book [Who's Who in Science and Engineering ]. According my knowledge it has always been reliable.
      • This "Publisher of Who's Who in America since 1899" is the real one, there has been another fake book with same name (or sound like?). Look selection criteria at the bottom of page.
      • I agree that this listing alone would not grant notability, but with Genealogy aspect it does. This kind of information serves Genealogical Reseachers.--Jack007 15:27, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Reply. The link provided above states that complete who's who db "features biographical profiles of 1.2 million of the most accomplished individuals". 1.2 million is too many people to consider their mere inclusion notable. We must instead examine what one has done in order to get in to who's who in order to determine notability. The article does not note anything remotely notable in science and engineering when held up to wikipedia notability stadards. Also the genealogy work is only a hobby. I'm glad you enjoy and excel at it but merely being good at a hobby is not notable.--Zudduz 16:56, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
          • Reply. Correct numbers are: "biographical facts on the more than 50,000 men and women leading today’s scientific and technological revolution."--Jack007 17:14, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 14:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete pure vanity; clearly fails WP:BIO; only about 40 Google hits for "Asko Makitalo", which include this article and a couple of dozen postings by the subject on various mailing lists. --Russ (talk) 14:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, article does not meet WP:BIO.--Isotope23 15:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, somebody's using Wikipedia as an online resume service. ColourBurst 18:00, 3 October 2006 (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.