Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baruch Sterman, Ph.D.

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 of the debate was Speedy delete under A8. The JPS ^{talk to me} 18:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Baruch Sterman, Ph.D.

Non-notable bio about a company CEO. Company in question has already had article deleted, however user has recreated the article and placed a note that we should bring it up to encyclopedic quality. Both articles should have been speedied. VoteL Delete - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 14:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment tagged article for cleanup/context. Subject does not appear to meet WP:BIO. No opinion though because this was brought to deletion 25 minutes after article creation with no attempt to contact originator with concerns about the article.--Isotope23 14:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment Article was tagged for speedy (db-bio) and contributor removed tag so therefore was well aware of the need to ascertain notability. As such there I felt there was no need to tell him again. FYI company article has been speedied (for second time) - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 14:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Good point by Isotope23 above, but lack of notification does not prevent this bio on a NN 'technichal visionary' being nominated for deletion. (BTW, 25 minutes seems positively polite given the timeframes for some nominations!) Colonel Tom 14:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment - naming convention would suggest that the Ph.D. be removed from the title if this was to be kept, I assume? It does smack of vanity, apart from anything else. Colonel Tom 14:51, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment, it doesn't prevent it from being nominated as there is no hard amount of time that needs to be waited before bringing something to AfD... but it goes against the spirit of the Articles for Deletion section Before nominating an AfD, goes against common courtesy, and contributes to the view that AfD's are biting newcomers. I wholly agree that the subject falls well short of WP:BIO, and I'm really not trying to pick on Stollery, but there is no harm in tagging the article, sending the originator a note on their userpage to read WP:BIO and update the article with information that meets the criteria, or this will be nominated for deletion in a few days. If the originators answer is that they can't source it (or they ignore the message), then speedy/AfD. I know I'm going off on a tangent here, but AfD is discouraging new editors from participating in Wikipedia when their first encounter with the community is an AfD notice on their page, no explanation, and an AfD reason like "subject not-notable". To be fair, I've been guilty of doing this in the past as well... I'd just like to see some of this behavior change.--Isotope23 15:16, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete no evidence of notability. Just zis Guy you know? 15:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• CSD A8 one more tag for this bugger: article created in the last 48 hours and all of its revisions are a blatant copyright infringement. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 16:47, 10 May 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.