Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marc Fest

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 keep --Durin 17:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marc Fest

Marc Fest (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

disputed Speedy for self-promotional sounding resume-like bio on NN-internet entrepreneur delete Cornell Rockey 04:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

NOTE This article was substantially rewritten and rereferenced on January 28 2006 - see Break Point below. --Kevin Murray 17:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Merge into Quickbrowse and metabrowsing, since (I really hope I'm not being to crude) this person's idea is more notable than him. To translate the nominator's statement:
This article was tagged for speedy deletion according to criterion regarding non-notable biographies, which can be viewed at Wikipedia:Notability (people). In addition, the article sounds like a resume, and due to a conflict of interests this article is also self-promotional.
I don't agree entirely with the resume-sounding-like part, but notability concerns seem significant to me. GracenotesT § 05:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • strike the word 'self-' from my nomination; I just meant that it sounded promotional/SPAMy/advert-like. My bad. Cornell Rockey 05:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Wait until there is a decision on the notablility of metabrowsing, which was Proded for being a neologism. I disputed the Prod as I don't see it as a clear cut case per the WP standards. I expect to see metabrowsing nominated for AfD. If the concept is notable, then Marc may be notable, but one choice must follow the other. --Kevin Murray 20:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
per Kevin Murray's comment, please see > Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metabrowsing Cornell Rockey 20:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Note the "strong keep" comment at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Metabrowsing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony343 (talk • contribs)

  • I don't think that you are looking beyond the obvious autobio aspects, which should be cleaned up. But there is something here. --Kevin Murray 17:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep Keep & Cleanup As written the article does not yet demonstrate why Fest is notable. The direct references support the notability of his company and provide well supported background informatin on the industry and past competitors which failed. But the link which is missing is why this makes Fest notable. I think that the information is indirectly sourced at http://www.quickbrowse.com/press/metabrowsing/ which is a reference at the article, that leads to a search engine result for Fest, and some of the sources seem to be non-trivial and tie Fest to the notability of his venture --Kevin Murray 17:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC) I spent some time rewritting and referencing some sources that demonstrate why Fest is notable. --Kevin Murray 21:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Break Point The article was substantially rewritten with non-trivial references to Fest's notability as of this point.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Nishkid64 01:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - I still feel like this could be merged into Quickbrowse and/or metabrowsing and I would be okay with it.-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 05:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep I think he seems to be notable as a minor dot-com celebrity who weathered the storm, although he is getting less attention now. The fact he has several different projects makes me want to keep this one; the minor projects like Trackles could be mentioned in his article, not elsewhere. --Brianyoumans 05:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Very weak keep for having multiple contributions including a significant one. —siroχo 07:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • If there were any justice in the world the result here would be delete. The test is not "non-triviality" but "notability." Nothing indicates that Fest, as apart from quickbrowse.com or metabrowsing generally, is notable. And Fest does not become notable because metabrowsing is notable. Allon Fambrizzi 08:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
I certainly agree, but this is definitely not a majority opinion on wikipedia...-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 22:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Very weak keep per Brianyoumans's logic. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. The article only motivates for the notability of metabrowsing. Unfortunately for Mr Fest his inventions/products are far more notable than he is. His other minor work is completely non-notable and shouldn't even be in the article in the first place, in fact the article still sounds like a form of promotion for the subject in question. Most of the info is referenced from the Quickbrowse website itself, which is not an independent source. Notability of the person himself has not been proven through coverage in "multiple 3rd-party non-trivial reliable references". Zunaid©® 12:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per Zunaid©®. Icemuon 16:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Looks okay to me. Iheartseeplusplus 19:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC) -- User has ten edits, all made within a ten-minute period.
  • Keep The first and last links in the "bibliography" section are to non-trivial reliable sources that are more about Fest than they are about his products. This seems to me to meet the requirements of WP:BIO. JulesH 19:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Repeat of above by me prior to relist. --Kevin Murray 03:32, 1 February 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.