Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Cleevely


 * 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   keep. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

David Cleevely

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Article reads like a CV. Most of the text was added by user. Notability is not provided by association with the (probably) notable company Abcam plc. MightyWarrior (talk) 21:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * keep Have deleted some of the less notable information - David Cleevely is one of the key drivers behind slicone fen. I believe that David Cleevely is notable and will try to gather more references.  BillyBobPedant (talk) 22:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 01:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Reads EXACTLY like a CV, non-notable, probable vanity.  --Lockley (talk) 03:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * can a more experience editor please suggest how to make this less CV-like? I was using Hermann Hauser as an article template as both figures achieve similar notoriety in Cambridge, but I've clearly not done a good enough job.  Help much appreciated.  Thanks. BillyBobPedant (talk) 08:47, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I looked into the sources and I think the article passes WP:N guideline. It only needs further improvement. A CV-like article does not warrant deletion. Dekisugi (talk) 08:55, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Definitely needs unfluffing but his professional fellowships seem to indicate some notability, as well as the claims he had the ear of some influential people (athough I need to check those claims out).  I may have a go at cleanup.  Baccyak4H (Yak!) 15:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Update I had a go at cleanup. Perhaps it could be unfluffed some more but it appears his notability comes from his broad range of involvements with startups and such.  Have another look.  Baccyak4H (Yak!) 15:55, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Update: I have added more information and the notable reference Hansard.  I hope that this helps.  BillyBobPedant (talk) 23:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - now seems to have enough references to pass WP:BIO. Terraxos (talk) 02:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: more info and refs added BillyBobPedant (talk) 16:55, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: The sources establish beyond question the notability of the subject. --Jmundo (talk) 20:27, 9 January 2009 (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.