Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Casalena


 * 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.  Sandstein  11:49, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Anthony Casalena

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Certainly not convincing for independent notability since he's simply best known for the company itself, nothing actually insinuating and substantiating his own convincing article since everything is about the company itself, which is deletion material as it is since it's all PR, and that's exactly what could be called about this one since it's all simply fluff-and-puff. SwisterTwister  talk  05:42, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:29, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:29, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * See also: Articles for deletion/Squarespace. North America1000 07:30, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

 References
 * Comment – Below is a source. North America1000 07:49, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Entrepreneur
 * Comment - The link above is also trivial and unconvincing as it's yet another subject-supplied interview and information about his career and the company's, none of it forms any confirmed substance. SwisterTwister   talk  07:54, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Being "best known for the company itself" does not affect notability. Sergey Brin, for example, is notable entirely because he is the co-founder and co-president of Google. If he hadn't started Google, or if Google had failed, he'd probably be an unknown programmer at Yahoo or Microsoft or something. Yet the Sergey Brin article is not only notable, but has official Good Article status, which means it's been confirmed as one of the best articles Wikipedia has to offer. 2602:306:3A29:9B90:608C:C2F8:2526:C3A4 (talk) 11:16, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Like with the Facebook and Twitter comparisons, this man is clearly not Serve Brin as this current article is not only filled with PR, the company itself uses PR, therefore it suggests the company simply wants to advertise itself, something that Google or its founder is not blatantly known for, but thid current article is, simply comparing this and hoping to find them the same thing is not conceivable at all. SwisterTwister   talk  15:58, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * An obvious option is to consider merging to Squarespace, as Casalena is its founder. North America1000 16:03, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - There is nothing actually substantial to merge since what's only in fact needed is his name, basically, listed there, because with anything else, it simply becomes a company business listing, and those concerns about it are emphasizes here as it is. SwisterTwister   talk  17:04, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Another option is to consider redirecting to Squarespace as a valid search term, as Casalena is its founder. North America1000 17:33, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:27, 6 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Squarespace as a valid search term. North America1000 01:16, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- non notable businessman. I don't see a need for a redirect as the subject's name is unlikely to have become a valid search term. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:30, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The page has received 2,692 page views in the last 90 days, which serves to qualify a redirect, in my opinion. North America1000 02:32, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - I also concur about having no redirect since, as it is, he's not notable apart from the company which is also currently at AfD, and then this article as well as the company article were items of clearly advertising contributions therefore we never compromise with matters like that. SwisterTwister   talk  02:44, 7 October 2016 (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.