Talk:Greg Fleming (businessman)

Review discussion
Hi, thanks for reviewing and commenting on this draft.

My objective is encyclopedic accuracy and completeness, along the lines of a B-level or GA-level article. My intention in this article has been to correct errors and omissions in online bios, blurbs, and articles on Fleming, including the errors in his LinkedIn (which I can detail if desired). And per WP:DUE, I also included facts which were mentioned over and over and over in a variety of highest-ranking news sources (Forbes, FT, NYT, WSJ, Reuters, Bloomberg). [That being: his three or four biggest deals, and his being repeatedly reported as the likely next CEO at Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley.] I also included explanations for the job position changes that came about specifically because someone left or was fired -- details that are clear when reported at the time but get lost in official blurbs and later summaries.

In keeping with your comment "We need to know what makes him notable", I have now added the relevant consensus (per multiple major sources) into the body text, and added a summary of that into the lede.

I did not find any controversies around Fleming. He was not involved in subprime mortgage trading, and in fact advised Merrill Lynch against it early on but was ignored. After his negotiating the sale of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America, Bank of America regretted agreeing to pay such a high price for Merrill Lynch right before it tanked, but that speaks to their lack of due diligence and the strength of his negotiating abilities rather than to any controversy.

I've trimmed the refs down to only what is needed to cite the facts presented.

If you need confirmation that Fleming meets WP:GNG and WP:BASIC, here is a list of 13 articles entirely about Fleming, in reliable independent (and non-interview) sources, plus two notable books by two notable authors which mention Fleming on dozens of pages. I can supply more examples of significant coverage if desired.

Articles:



Books:

-- TerryBG (talk) 00:48, 27 March 2021 (UTC)


 * @TerryBG AlI can offer is advice. I hope you are correct. I suspect I am. Fiddle   Faddle  07:06, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

AFC article review
Hello Timtrent, you declined this AFC submission with the rationale "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)."

Greg Fleming has been notable on Wall Street since at least 2006, when the Wall Street Journal called him "Merrill Lynch's Keystone". Here is a sampling of nearly two dozen full, independent articles on him in major sources since 2006:

Articles:



Books:







In addition to independent news coverage, nearly every book on the devolution of the subprime mortgage crisis covers Fleming extensively on numerous pages, because he saved Merrill Lynch from bankruptcy by orchestrating its sale to Bank of America (and at a remarkably high price) in September 2008. These books include: Andrew Ross Sorkin's Too Big to Fail: The Inside Story of How Wall Street and Washington Fought to Save the Financial System—and Themselves; Ron Suskind's Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President; Bethany McLean's and Joseph Nocera's All the Devils Are Here: The Hidden History of the Financial Crisis; and Greg Farrell's Crash of the Titans: Greed, Hubris, the Fall of Merrill Lynch. The books and page numbers are listed at the bottom of the above collapsed list of significant coverage.

The above-listed coverage is just a small sampling of the many dozens of news articles which have covered Fleming significantly over the past 15 years. He more than meets Wikipedia guidelines on the notability of people. TerryBG (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


 * @TerryBG i expect you also noted my comment Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 07:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * You get paid to create this article, so please don't expect a loti of help from volunteers. Earning your hire would be a good idea instead of arguing. Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 08:31, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Notability
, I see you are an administrator who is an active AFC reviewer. Would you be willing to assess the notability of Greg Fleming?

Here is a sampling of nearly two dozen full, independent articles on him in major sources since 2006, when the Wall Street Journal called him "Merrill Lynch's Keystone":

Articles:



Books:







In addition to extensive independent news coverage, nearly every book on the devolution of the subprime mortgage crisis covers Fleming extensively, usually on dozens of pages, because he saved Merrill Lynch from bankruptcy by orchestrating its sale to Bank of America (and at a remarkably high price) in September 2008. These books include: Andrew Ross Sorkin's Too Big to Fail: The Inside Story of How Wall Street and Washington Fought to Save the Financial System—and Themselves; Ron Suskind's Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President; Bethany McLean's and Joseph Nocera's All the Devils Are Here: The Hidden History of the Financial Crisis; and Greg Farrell's Crash of the Titans: Greed, Hubris, the Fall of Merrill Lynch. The books and page numbers are listed at the bottom of the above collapsed list of significant coverage.

The above-listed coverage is just a small sampling of the many dozens of news articles which have covered Fleming significantly over the past 15 years.

I am the creator of the draft; my COI is declared here.

Thank you kindly. TerryBG (talk) 02:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)


 * As a general comment, the titles of article in newspapers are not reliable sources; they are written by the editorial staff for effect, not by the reporter as proper journalism. They should not be quoted to establish reputation or notability . As another general comment, even if one of us AfC reviewwrs passes an article, w are merely saying that we think the article would probably pass a community discussion at AfD if challenged-- only the community at an AfD can decide notability --our role is just to screen out the promotional  and clearly non-notable
 * Looking at the article, I consider the comments of my friend and colleague to be very much on point, as I would expect: he says that the individual might be notable, but the article is too promotional  to show it. There is too much general discussion not strictly devoted to his career, and the apparent purpose is name dropping, as would be appropriate in a press release, but not a WP article. It is in my long experience here as an afc reviewer and as an administrator very difficult for COI editors to write a properly NPOV article: they say what the subject might wish said, but that's not what the general reader  might want to find here. .   Edit it the way he advised you: remove peripheral material. (if he is appointed to a position, the name of the prominent person who appoints him is not to the point here, proud though he may be of it personally) Focus on his   accomplishments, as justified by the good sources; the weak sources should be eliminated as unnecessary and as giving the impression of promotionalism  -- CITEKILL is exactly the point. Then resubmit. One or another of the many qualified reviewers will then judge. If the changes are trivial, they are likely not to judge favorably.  I  have a quite liberal attitude: I will help a coi editor if they seem willing to follow the advice; you cannot expect us to rewrite the article ourselves for which you are hte one being paid. And if you can't write a satisfactory article here, why should anyone pay you?   DGG ( talk ) 09:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @DGG Thank you for your comments. I am pleased when we agree. When we disagree either learns from the other.
 * @TerryBG You have not made any attempt to edit this draft in a constructive manner since 22 May 2021. Instead of arguing the toss and making the identical points more than once, perhaps you will consider that others might know better how to create articles here than you. I seem to recall that you tried "reporting me" to a noticeboard or other. It seems you did not like the advice I gave you, and equated it with some sort of harassment. It was not. It was the advice you really ought to have heeded. Now that advice has been reinforced might I suggest that you either get on with the task someone is paying you to do or abandon it. Wikipedia will be improved either way.
 * Declaring that you are a paid editor does not give you any entitlement to create poor drafts and expect that they will be accepted. If you are a good writer you wil be able to write a useful draft that is accepted. If you are not, then I echo DGG's rhetorical question as their final sentence in their comment above this. Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 13:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

New version
To, I've worked to reduce size and scope and focused more on his career, hopefully drastically enough this time for the changes to seem more tangible. Any feedback would of course be greatly appreciated - thanks again. TerryBG (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2022 (UTC)