Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonas Jacobi

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. Carlossuarez46 23:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jonas Jacobi

Jonas Jacobi (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

AFD: reason:

  1. a user called Jonas.Jacobi initially created the article about Jonas Jacobi,
  2. the subject JJ wrote zero computer scientific articles,
  3. JJ has acquired zero computer scientific awards,
  4. JJ has written zero comma five book about Java/AJAX/TLA that is so blatantly erroneous, that when a WP:editor tried to surf into a web page made according to this book, that WP:editor was forced to kill his internet browser by a very gruesome and almost evil unix command,

Article subject fulfill all of the following ignorability criteria (inversed from WP:BIO):

  • zero secondary sources,
  • zero biographies,
  • zero awards,
  • zero wide recognition,
  • zero widely recognized contribution to CompSci, unless hanging one mozilla counts,
  • one commercial endorsements of exactly zero comma five demonstrably dangerous and destructive products.

Wikipedia:Vanispamcruftisement seems to be the one perfect axe to calmly "attach to the neck" of the article. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 14:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete — I see no assertion of notability. Even if it did assert notability because he wrote a ...for Dummies book, I'd say that it still isn't notable. There are squillions of those books, and co-authoring a single book (assuming the book itself isn't highly remarkable) is not particularly notable. Whilst I don't think the quality of a personal website really matters, it is important that the guy seems to have no notable, high-profile, contribution to anything whatsoever. Add in the fact that this is a vanity page and the only external link is to an Amazon.com book page, and I think we're quite safe to delete this one. Angus Lepper(T, C, D) 15:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
    Yes. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 18:54, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Neutral. I'd like to see a more thorough and cited discussion regarding this person's notability. I'm not a big fan of the ghit argument, but I would say that 46,000+ ghits warrants further investigation, as does industry notability indicated by things like this. Groupthink 19:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, going by his promotional bio here (warning: popup & noisy ad), seems to be only marginally notable. If there were independent reviews of his books found or the company becomes notable we could reconsider. --Dhartung | Talk 13:12, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. (1) is not a reason for deletion, there is zero evidence for (2) or (3) (and they are not reasons for deletion, and I am nearly positive that (2) is blatantly false), and I have no clue what (4) says. This person is a notable writer and speaker, and very well-known. Pro JSF and Ajax seems like a fairly popular book as well. He has attracted significant attention from credible secondary sources, e.g. this, this, etc. Remember, the proper qualification is verifiable, not verified. — xDanielxTalk 06:00, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

On this:

Mr. Jacobi is a frequent speaker at international conferences and has written numerous articles for leading IT magazines such as Java Developer's Journal, JavaPro, AjaxWorld, and Oracle Magazine. Jonas is co-author of the recently published book Pro JSF and Ajax: Building Rich Internet Components, (Apress).

Can I retract my own AfD? Even if I have a "scientific" bias and regards IT magazines as not ensuring enought quality in all cases, the articles in question may actually be good enough for what I regard as "scientific-quality" articles: read first, estimate afterwards. As regards hanging mozilla on Linux – just a crude (and slightly sadistic) estimation on the techniques used. I would like it if someone replaced my AfD with a Request-to-Improve/Debias. Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 09:38, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you can rescind your own nomination, in which case the current AfD discussion will be closed (although someone else can AfD nom this article later on). If you don't know how to do a non-admin closure, just post a message here stating that you withdraw your nomination and someone will close this AfD nom for you. Groupthink 04:24, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Darn! Now it happened again? killall -KILL mozilla. What is it that makes my mozilla hang on just this guy?? Said: Rursus ☺ ★ 09:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, down with spam. Burntsauce 18:30, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. per xDanielxTalk, also smells of potential personal bias towards this person? (when you take into consideration the potentially blatantly false statement in the nomination) Mathmo Talk 22:01, 8 August 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.