Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill-Good

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 dealt with as copyvio. W.marsh 01:51, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bill-Good

No Vote but placing in AfD as NN bio. The article seemed to indicate that the subject is notable at first glance, but in looking closer, I questioned the subject's notability. First "Fresh out of college, Bill was a statistical analyst in New York with Alan Greenspan, now Chairman of the Federal Reserve."--Does that mean they worked in the same building? Mr. Greenspan is obviously notable, but does working with him "fresh out of college" make the subject notable? Secondly, "He later worked as a news reporter and editorial researcher for the publisher of Barron 's."...not Barron's itself, but the publisher of Barron's. I have also created the AfD nomination for Bill Good Marketing, which currently seems to indicate that the business itself is non-notable, so being the CEO of a non-notable company should not make the subject notable. I don't want to give the impression that I have an agenda with this, which is why I am not voting here, just putting this one up for debate. Bugwit grunt / scribbles 17:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as vanity article. Wikipedia isn't a CV database. Brian G. Crawford, the so-called "Nancy Grace of AfD" 17:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
• Obvious Keep, conspicuously notable as published author; a book that goes through six printings from Scribners (hardly an obscure publishing house) obviously meets the applicable notability criterion (typically even a single Scribners printing would); and a nine-year-old book with even a modestly high Amazon rank also indicates notability. I happen to think telemarketers should be slowly beaten to death with spiny objects, with periodic breaks for immersion in salt water and caustic liquids, but even those who hold less moderate views than mine would, I expect, agree that one of the founders of the field is a notable evildoer. Monicasdude 20:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Brian Crawford. Harro5 21:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Brian; WP:VSCA applies. Also, while the nomination is technically a no vote, the article should go for the reasons detailed therein. --Kinu ^t/_c 21:35, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep while it is a clear case of vanity, he is marginally notable. The article just need a make over. Eivind^t@c 23:44, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Brian. Joe 00:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. --Khoikhoi 02:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Monicasdude as major published author. -- JJay 18:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: copyvio. Melchoir 06:22, 24 March 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.