Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Saintloth


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 10:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

David Saintloth

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable individual lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Appears to fail WP:BIO  ttonyb (talk) 01:36, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep I work in the IT industry in NYC and I saw this person actually speak at several start up events, the references and external links point to a compliment of activity as well related to software and the startup he runs. It thus stands up to wikipedia publishing policy. I think for those reasons it should stay...if all new entries are deleted so early in their create stage how do they ever get to grow? 24.189.131.99 (talk) 01:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC) — 24.189.131.99 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment – Please review WP:BIO and reliable sources and advise how this article meets the criteria for notability and is supported by reliable sources.  ttonyb  (talk) 02:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree with the other poster, I have read many of the blog posts on software design and signed up for beta of the startup. He is notable enough to me, I don't think this profile violates wikipedia rules so it should stay.Imomeena (talk) 02:01, 20 March 2010 (UTC) — Imomeena (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment – Please review WP:BIO and reliable sources and advise how this article meets the criteria for notability and is supported by reliable sources.  ttonyb  (talk) 02:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. The gist of his claim seems to be that he has a blog (like perhaps tens of millions of people worldwide) and that is an officer at a business and a think tank. Those entities don't seem to be notable (they lack their own articles and lack significant coverage), so it's hard to see notability deriving from that. We don't have anything here from independent sources of awards, accomplishments, remarkable financial success. Merely being an officer in a business is not enough. And speaking at some identified event doesn't confer notability either. --JamesAM (talk) 03:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete What I see by searching is someone who is active in blogs and web communities, but the only possibly notable reference I can find is one patent, and that alone isn't really enough -- Boing!   said Zebedee  11:56, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. I didn't comment on this first time round because it was such an obvious "delete". I don't understand why this had to be relisted, as the "keep" opinions above say nothing about how this might meet Wikipedia standards. Since when was being seen to "actually speak" a reason for anyone to have an encyclopedia article written about them? I have also "actually spoken" at IT industry events, but that doesn't make me notable. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:23, 28 March 2010 (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.