Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Rodrigues


 * 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 redirect to Kareo. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Dan Rodrigues

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable person. The only source providing substantial coverage is a 3 part interview at http://www.sramanamitra.com/. Interviews are fairly useless as reliable sources and I don't think the site meets RS either. The others are brief mentions or don't even mention him e.g.. Searches for other potential sources have not turned up anything suitable. SmartSE (talk) 15:40, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm the creator of this article. I think I'm also being accused of having a conflict of interest, which I hope doesn't diminish the value of my obvious Keep vote, but I'd like to chime in anyway.  Dan Rodrigues founded two companies, Scour and Kareo that have received media coverage, and which are accordingly on Wikipedia.  Sources for this article included mentions of him in the NY Times[], the Orange County Register[] and CNET[], in addition to a longer interview[] which provides a good deal of useful biographical information.  I can't speak to how reliable it is, but it seems quite detailed and professional enough.  All this information is readily available online with a Google search.  I just added another source from page 1 on Google,[] to source his age when founding Scour, his first company, and how he transitioned from running a consulting company to his current company Kareo.  I think there's enough there now, but can add more if necessary.  I'll wait for the group's consensus.Timtempleton (talk) 23:41, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Notability is not inherited so it is irrelevant whether or not he founded notable companies. The crucial word in your rationale is 'mentions' because as I stated in the nomination, mentions are of no use for determining notability. The source you added is an interview in a specialist industry publication, which isn't much use either. SmartSE (talk) 12:40, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Did you see that I added another source? I can look for some more if it's not enough, but let's see what someone else thinks.Timtempleton (talk) 14:42, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. I took a look at the sources and reviewed the third-party ones that actually mention Rodrigues in more than passing fashion.  (I did not review the WSJ sources as they’re behind a paywall.)  In all I see one source that plainly is the kind of thing that helps establish notability (a 2008 interview at salon.com), one that might (an interview at electronichealthreporter.com) and two that don’t, by reason of scope or source reliability.


 * Startup, Survival, Scaling: Kareo CEO Dan Rodrigues – blog post, uncertain / unknown reliability


 * Agent's Role In Music Site May Be Shift In Rights War – NY Times – RS, but just a couple quotes; not direct coverage of Rodrigues


 * HIT Thought Leader Highlight: Dan Rodrigues, Kareo – an interview of him in an on line industry news site; perhaps RS.


 * Why Scour is not the new Napster – Salon.com – RS, direct interview; but old


 * I echo the observation that being CEO of a notable company does not make one notable. I looked around and found a good deal about his companies, which of course usually includes his name as president or founder, but not much about him personally.  What’s there is not nothing – but to me it’s not enough.  Absent more sources covering him, versus incidental mentions or company coverage, I’d be inclined to delete.  JohnInDC (talk) 14:29, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Source #14 (SoCalTech) [] is a somewhat detailed profile of Rodrigues that wasn't listed above, and it's a good reliable source. There are a couple of videos posted on him in his Google search results but they look like they were posted by companies that invest in them, so I skipped them.  I'll start a Google alert and keep my eye out for more coverage.  Timtempleton (talk) 03:31, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I found and integrated info from a more recent (Aug. 2015) Rodrigues interview, from LATechwatch.com. It's source #16 now.[].  It's a company profile, but there's some personal info there, but I didn't use all of it as it was info of secondary interest, such as his favorite LA bar.Timtempleton (talk) 23:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep Seems notable, decent article, it might just need more editing. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 12:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:41, 15 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: There's not a clear path either way so, considering there's no firm perspective of votes, I'm relisting again with hopes of a better consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SwisterTwister   talk  05:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and perhaps Redirect to Kareo as this is still questionable for the necessary solid independent notability apart from the company itself, thus for his own notable article. SwisterTwister   talk  05:42, 23 April 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.