Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darren Roos (2nd nomination)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Editors identified at most one example of significant coverage in a reliable source, falling short of WP:GNG. signed,Rosguill talk 15:12, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Darren Roos
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article was already nominated for deletion once, the consensus was to delete. A year later somebody recreated it. I don't see anything that has changed since the original deletion to justify maintaining this biography page. Citations in trade publications do not make a person notable. Rhombus (talk) 14:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Rhombus (talk) 14:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing beyond confirmation of employment in sources used. All I find for sourcing is interviews and PR stuff. Oaktree b (talk) 17:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete The person will be notable when his track record in his company (IFS AB) or thereafter becomes more significant. At present there do not seem to be enough verified facts to warrant a separate biographical article, and those that exist could be included in his company's article. My Gussie (talk) 22:41, 13 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep found in depth article in the Financial Mail via the Wikipedia Library and ProQuest:
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 00:22, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The Financial Mail is a trade publication with a circulation (according to its Wikipedia page!) of ~19,000. A profile in a trade publication does not make a person notable. Is it a publication of record? Like a major national newspaper or financial newspaper? The trouble with magazines like this one is that they very often take money for publication. Also, it's one article. Is that all it takes to be notable enough to end up with a Wikipedia bio?
 * Let's remember that Wikipedia is often misused by people as an enhanced LinkedIn. There are providers who sell article generation and maintenance for self-promotion as a service. I think that's what is going on here, and we have a responsibility to fight that kind of misuse. Rhombus (talk) 16:18, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Rhombus, is there a prohibition against reliable trade publications? Is there a requirement that a reliable source be a "publication of record"? Does this publication publish articles for money? If so, why do annual subscriptions cost 1440 Rand ($80 USD). They claim to be a national news site - is this false?
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 02:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 02:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 00:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 00:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 00:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 00:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dus</b><b style="color:#00F">t</b><b style="color:#60C">i</b>*Let's talk!* 13:26, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - per searched info by editor above. Seems to overall fall within WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 08:58, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment: Rhombus, is there a prohibition against reliable trade publications? Is there a requirement that a reliable source be a "publication of record"? Does this publication publish articles for money? If so, why do annual subscriptions cost 1440 Rand ($80 USD). They claim to be a national news site - is this false?
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 02:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment Business Live is the website of Business Day, a long established national daily newspaper, that's a WP:RS and the Financial Mail both founded in 1959. It is NOT a "trade publication", but a well-respected publication with a long pedigree. Park3r (talk) 09:26, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Park3r Do you have ties to Business Day or the Financial Mail? Rhombus (talk) 09:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * No I do not have any ties to either publication. I am familiar with both sources as a reader though. Park3r (talk) 18:19, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no requirement that a source be a "publication of record" - but it's a useful rule of thumb, and I mention it to encourage some thought about what it means for a source to be high-quality.
 * Paid-subscription publications take money for editorial content all the time, and if anything, this problem is getting worse, not better. This is especially true of trade publications. I don't yet see any evidence that this is a reliable source. The onus should be on the person citing to establish that a source is reliable. Rhombus (talk) 09:34, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   ArcAngel    (talk) 22:19, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Thoroughly unremarkable businessman with run of the mill coverage. I would assume good faith on the part of the article creator however: usually the perps for paid-for vanity articles either have previous form or have done the few edits becessary before creating the lump of fluff.TheLongTone (talk) 14:22, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * TheLongTone, the article's creator, Cossde, has made 25,000+ edits over the last 15 years. The article they started looks well-referenced and neutral. (diff) They are not a paid editor.
 * @Rhombus, don't forget to notify the article's creator of this AfD.
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 20:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I have notified the author. This should normally be part of listing the AfD. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 14:39, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I used the automated tools to post to AfD. I assumed the author would automatically be notified. If that did not occur, I apologise. Rhombus (talk) 09:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable businessman, I don't see anything which clearly passes GNG here. SportingFlyer  T · C  19:44, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Question: In what way is Roos "Sweden-related"? I don't find anything in the article linking him to Sweden. /FredrikT (talk) 09:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @FredrikT: Roos is the CEO of IFS AB, a very large software company in Linköping
 * -- A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 14:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Even if the Financial Mail article is reliable, one article is not enough. Per WP:NBLP, multiple sources are needed. ARandomName123 (talk) 20:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.