Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florian Balmer


 * 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   no consensus.  MBisanz  talk 03:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Florian Balmer

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

Non-notable software developer Psychonaut (talk) 17:20, 11 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep – The European community my disagree with you here. Regarding Dr. Balmer and Notepad2 I believe Notability has been established for both.  However, in researching the piece, it looks like neither stands without the other as shown here,, .  Though I expressed a keep opinion on the bases, anyone looking up Notepad2 may want additional information on Dr. Balmer, a merge/redirect may be more appropriate. Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 18:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - The USA and the Washington State community also disagrees with a suggested deletion. Regarding Dr. Balmer and Notepad2 has a very useful place here as indeed additional information on Dr. Balmer is most appropriate and relevant for the reasons given below. In addition I only came to know Dr. Balmer a few days ago while looking up searching Notepad2, finding this reference, and connecting with Dr. Balmer. He responded quickly, offering academic information and suggestions; my most pleasing experience and rewarding connection through Wikipedia in many years of use! Keeping post as is with appropriate cross references would be most appropriate. Kind regards, CarySnyder (talk) 01:28, 12 December 2008 (UTC), — CarySnyder (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * It doesn't matter how polite and academic the man is; the criteria for biographies on Wikipedia is that the subject is the primary subject of independent, published sources. Can anyone provide evidence of a book or article about Florian Balmer himself? —Psychonaut (talk) 09:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes - see the cites given in my opinion. Granted they are in German for the news articles, but we accept foreign sources as readily as English. ShoesssS Talk 13:38, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Those aren't cites; those are Google searches. Please provide citations (author, title, journal/magazine/newspaper title, and date) for articles about Florian Balmer, not those which merely mention him or his Notepad2 software. —Psychonaut (talk) 10:53, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Any notability appears to be attributed to Notepad2 which already has a Wikipedia article. Aside from that, Balmer's notability doesn't appear to be demonstrated anywhere else. --Amwestover (talk|contrib) 04:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - which lends itself to merge/redirect versus delete. Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 23:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Fair enough, but the Notepad2 article already mentions Balmer as the developer. Other than that, what else is there to merge into the article from the existing Florian Balmer article? Maybe a redirect is more appropriate. --Amwestover (talk|contrib) 02:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Exactly, when you say delete  without merge/redirecting, the article is deleted along with the articles title and information, there by losing any reference or connection between one and the other.  My contention is that Dr. Balmer as the creator of Notepad2 is shuffled to the background even though they go hand and hand as both being notable.  Which I believe is a disservice to both.  Therefore my merge/redirect opinion or as you say redirect.  Thanks ShoesssS Talk 02:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Has he truly no other notability? The article mentions other utilities, so what are they. Typically, a developer /author/artist/wgetever is more notable than a single work, because they have the potential to do more than one of them, and it doesn't go the other way round, at least not for projects done by individuals. So if there is material to add to the article, that would be enough reason to keep it. DGG (talk) 03:22, 15 December 2008 (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.