Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karim Rashid

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 10:22, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

Karim Rashid
Tagged for speedy deletion with the reason "Wikipedia is not a resume service". No vote I vote keep, below. Kappa 01:30, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, possible vanity. Megan1967 02:00, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I felt like this article is just promoting himself, not really supposed to be on Wikipedia. Zscout370 02:11, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC) (See Below)
 * Keep guys with Time Magazine articles about them. Kappa 02:38, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * and industrial designers who get 48,800 hits. (Sorry, didn't have time to google before nominating.) Kappa 02:44, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * That's fine - IMO, people de-speedying articles for VfD and those finding orphaned nominations don't have to explain themselves, becauase it's not their nomination. Oh, and keep. Chris 02:49, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: The way the articled is presented is deemed to be self promotion and Wikipedia is not really supposedly to be used for that. Even though it is great he has been featured in a publication like Time, but I still think this article is self-promotion. Zscout370 02:54, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I think it only 'looks' like self-promotion because it relies too much on other promotional materials, and this is a problem that can be fixed. Kappa 03:07, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Then let's see what happens with the voting. If it should be kept, then  it should need major cleaning up. Zscout370 04:17, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Article has seen some decent cleanup from the original author, which is nice. Looks notable in his field too. Keep. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 06:26, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * It appears that this article has been cleaned up to NPOV, which is what we strive for here isn't it? If they're featured in TIME Magazine, I consider them notable. If he, himself, did this article, then it should be rewritten so as to not give that impression. For a clean article, keep. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:32, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems to be notable in his field. Capitalistroadster 07:04, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, but cleanup. You won me over, however, I personally think it could be cleaned up a little bit to make it non-vanity. Zscout370 15:23, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - David Gerard 17:29, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - I've been won over. I originally put the speedy delete tag on because the first version of the article looked like a resume. I've seen the edit and can see some value in the article. I think maybe a cleanup could be done though. Jwinters | Talk 16:59, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Very strong keep Geez, people... Rashid is one of the most famous and notable designers right now, right up there with people like Phillipe Starck. I have one of his chairs.  A simple two-second Google test would tell you that he isn't remotely like the vanity articles we deal with everyday (high schoolers, etc.).  Keep keep keep keep keep keep keep.  Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  13:48, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.