Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Evoy (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 as non-notable subject engaging in self-promotion. I didn't see a cite from the Globe and Mail, and the other refs aren't third-party sources. He's not Bill Gates or Steve Jobs – there's no comparison except all three are male. Krakatoa Katie  11:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Ken Evoy
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

procedural nomination This was previously considered at AFD Jan-Feb 2007 ( User:The Epopt ) and was nominated for WP:PROD-based deletion in Aug 2007 ( User:Hu12 ). The new nomination was accompanied with the reason for deletion "Self-promotion, Spam, NN". The old nomination was originally a speedy deletion candidate; it was taken to AFD with the reason for deletion "This short bio reads like a résumé or perhaps spam." The outcome of the AFD was 'no consensus'. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 23:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC) ~ While I started this article a while back there have been a lot of contributions (revisions and reverts) since then. The bio was made shorter due not wanting to repeat what could be found in the cited articles. Looking at a page like that of Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, however, it would seem that the repetition of information is accepted for bios. If this is correct, then the page could conform to a "Jobs/Gates" format prior to deletion. Or am I missing the point of bios? This is my first one so it's possible. Thanks for any input you can provide! Maltiti2005 04:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete. Self promotion, spam, and I am confused how you get no consensus on an AFD.  Even the claims of notability are totally vague and don't provide enough info to even assert notability.  It just says 'he is important' without asserting the meat of WHY.  He is "highly regarded", and yes, the rest of the article is also weasel words.  No brainer, IMO, this is speedy. Pharmboy 23:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Modifications have been made to the article. They address the apparent need for additional content, further proof of notability and standardized "bio format." Placeholders have been added for future additions. Maltiti2005 09:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  14:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as article fails to demonstrate notability per Notability (people). --Gavin Collins 14:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by M.V.E.i. (talk • contribs) 19:49, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
 * Note Wikipedia is not a democracy so just 'voting' is meaningless. Consensus != majority vote, and a vote without explanation is not a vote at all.  Pharmboy 23:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep as original article's previous attempts to demonstrate notability were modified. Further, a reasonable amount of time should be granted to update the article. Maltiti2005 03:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - the article cites two references in which Ken Evoy is the primary subject of the article. The Globe and Mail is a major Canadian national paper and the Montreal Gazette is a major Montreal daily so this satisifies WP:BIO for multiple articles from reliable sources. -- Whpq 21:13, 30 August 2007 (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.