Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Novik

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 all but Weddle. Sr13 08:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Steven Novik

Steven Novik (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Contested prods. This, and the related articles which follow are resumes of four executives at a prominent, but not world-shaking, company. Wikipedia is not a collection of resumes. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

This also includes

  • Delete as nom. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete since Wikipedia is not the place to publish your resume; and also since no sources whatsoever are given (not to speak of independent coverage). --B. Wolterding 17:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Very obvious fluff pages. --sumnjim talk with me·changes 17:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete- per all of the above. Eddie 22:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
  • I do not believe the above articles should be deleted. They inform people of the executives who run a company. Isn't that what Wikipedia is for? So that someone who would like to know more about a person or thing they can search for it here and read more about the person or thing? For those of you complaining, please see the CEO of Goldman Sach's page, as its more "fluff" than these.
  • Delete. To the creator, the encyclopedia is for articles on notable people judged by secondary, reliable sources to have wide recognition, influence or impact. Simply being a company executive isn't enough. Someday I hope that my company's CEO and Board Chair are notable enough for their own article. Until I'm certain they pass the guideline WP:Notability (people), I'll wait to post and I'll flag the conflict of interest, too. Canuckle 22:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Wedell or list separately. The CEO of a large company is normally notable. (The company claims a revenue of $3 billion or so, whch counts as large. ) He's "managing partner" , which is the equivalent; the others are heads of Accounting, HR, & Recruiting. There will need to be some outside reference, but there should be one in the trade press. I do not like the practice of a joint nomination of people with possibly different degrees of notability--the one likely one may get swept away (or vice versa), DGG 00:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Novik, Dude and Scott. No vote on Weddle. Agree with DGG, the 3 are executives in the company and are unlikely to be notable per their positions. Indeed, the articles fail to assert how they would pass WP:BIO. A search for Weddle yields 87 unique Ghits], some of which may indicate he may be notable, so should be examined separately. Ohconfucius 01:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Wedell Being head of one the largest financial institutions in the US has pretty strong claim to notability. There should be a complete revision of his article of course.- thank you Astuishin (talk) 08:25, 23 June 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.