Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Harris Goldman

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. --Coredesat 03:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stephen Harris Goldman

Stephen Harris Goldman (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article smacks of obvious NPOV violation and article's sole contributor, User:Youknowyouknowmyname, is the son of the subject. This article is in violation of both of the "core wikipedia policies" enumerated in WP:NPOV, both NPOV, and the faxt that User:Youknowyouknowmyname cites himself as a reference as seen at diff. --Valley2city₪‽ 04:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete I see no claim of notability, or grounds for one. Pete.Hurd 05:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I see 'claims' for notability (groundbreaking work in technology, compositions performed by major orchestras), but no proof, i.e. references. The burden of proof should be on the creators of articles, not those reading them. --killing sparrows 12:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I was the closing admin on the earlier PROD deletion. I restored it when the creator protested on my talk page. I placed the Unsourced template on the page last night to try to get some standard sourcing. The creator replaced it with an effectively WP:OR source that doesn't even touch on most of the things mentioned in the article. We need 3rd party sources for articles like this. I might change my vote if such valid sourcing is provided, but as it is, it should go away IMHO. - TexasAndroid 15:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete I did some digging and found a bit of controversy, but I don't think it is enough to save the article, so far. DPT does seem to have been a pretty successful company; there isn't much about it online because the company was sold in 1999, which is a long time ago in web-time. But if someone found an article saying they made real contributions, this might be worth keeping.Brianyoumans 22:44, 5 April 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.