Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Ritchie (trader)

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. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-26 13:10Z

[edit] Mark Ritchie (trader)

Mark Ritchie (trader) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Being mentioned in a book, is this enough to make this bio's notable? Fails WP:BIO and Wikipedia:Notability; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randy McKay (trader), Al Weiss. Seems this is One in a large series of article spam: see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Spam/2006_Archive_Dec#Major_article_spam.3F.--Hu12 12:34, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 14:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, notable enough.--Ioannes Pragensis 23:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Does not meet criteria for sufficient notability listed in the Wikipedia:Notability (people)--Hu12 00:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep , after a minor rewrite with reliable sources. The Lead section shows notability and the References section should be read by the editors. Just needs even further expansion. Reason for deletion is no longer valid. There appear to be many separate industry media reference links, that shows there is reasonable industry interest. Meets this criterion from WP:BIO - "The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person."

• I am constantly baffled by the degree to which we tolerate deletion abuse. This is factual, and verifiable. Well-referenced, encyclopaedic. I'm having trouble seriously believing it's possible to nominate this article in good faith. I'm not sure what the agenda is here but the subject is clearly notable. This person has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of this person. I found plenty of sources in a Lexis-Nexis search. This article can be cleaned up and set on track.

• All of the links provided are from independent reliable third-party, reputable, non-trivial published sources.

• Editors please look at the multiple independent reliable sources under References.
• I found multiple non-trivial reliable external sources about "Mark A. Ritchie", the Money Manager and acomplished author of 2 books, this then establishes notability. It meets notability criteria and sources are reliable.

• Clearly notable, and widely reported. Perhaps a better article needs to be written, but this is not the form for doing that. He has been featured in mainstream newsprint publications, including BusinessWeek, The Wall Street Journal. It should be noted that due to a large overhaul of the page, all votes before the overhaul of the Wikipedia article should be reconsidered. The result should be Speedily closed, as the article has been revised. The article was not properly sourced when it was nominated, and has now been much improved.
• Here is a very short list of references: [1] and [2] & [3]

Trade2tradewell 00:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep once again, I thank Trade2tradewell for his meticulous documentation. DGG 02:10, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. The AfD's in this string have common characteristics: The subject is notable within a specialized business-related field; the article has stylistic problems and includes puffery but has enough substance to establish notability. AfD should not be used as Cleanup. JamesMLane t c 16:47, 25 December 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.