Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Bock


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:25, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Larry Bock

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

If you exclude the list of his investments, what does this article actually say? Nothing to demonstrate notability.Bikeroo (talk) 19:58, 5 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk to me  21:06, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Keep – He's a notable venture capitalist and the founder of the USA Science and Engineering Festival, which has an article. I suppose we could omit the list of his investments, although that's kind of like saying about an architect, if you subtract the list of his buildings what did he do? The list would be better if we selected companies that have articles, like Illumina (company), and added a short description of each. That would address the Underlinked tag. The book references appear to be genuine but underdeveloped. What does it mean to call him a "keystone species"? That needs a paragraph of explanation. – Margin1522 (talk) 01:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - I learned about Larry Bock from reading The Rainforest: The Secret to Building the Next Silicon Valley. In it it used Bock as a primary example of keystone species. He is also quoted or mentioned in several other books.Rexwevk (talk) 20:50, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to USA Science and Engineering Festival. Adding a sentence or two to that article (where he is not mentioned today) giving Bock as a force behind the festival should suffice. The article on Bock does not provide much information beyond a list of his investments, which do not make him notable. There isn't much use keeping a separate article that doesn't have much to say, and it appears that his claim to fame is the festival, so he should be given credit there. LaMona (talk) 21:53, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 03:39, 13 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  04:00, 22 December 2014 (UTC) Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The article notes: "Larry Bock is not a household name in Silicon Valley, but perhaps he should be. During the past 17 years, he has been one of the most prolific and successful entrepreneurs in biotechnology. An early bird in biotech, the 43-year-old Bock founded 12 biotech start-ups, eight of which trade on the Nasdaq, and has made good money on most of them. He has seeded several others that have gone public. Last year, though, Bock flew the biotech coop. A consolidation in the industry had made it too hard to sell products to the big pharmaceutical companies, he said. Instead, he has incubated a Palo Alto start-up, Nanosys, which plays in the emerging field of nanotechnology."The San Jose Mercury News article also notes: "Red Herring magazine recently named Bock one of the top 10 innovators of 2000." The Red Herring magazine coverage is a second source about the subject. There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Larry Bock to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 07:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment – I'd just like to say that I think we are underestimating him if we regard him only as an investor. He's also a scientist. For example, with Illumina (company), he recognized the commercial potential of technology that existed at Brown University, negotiated a license, organized the financing and founded the company. It's now a very significant company, with 70% market share in genome-sequencing machines. He's done this with many other companies, often serving as the initial CEO. I think that's notable, and there is no lack of sources about it, notably the book mentioned by . So I would say he qualifies under GNG. – Margin1522 (talk) 01:58, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - I think he is notable enough for inclusion into the encyclopedia. He's been covered in books, magazines and newspapers, many of which constitute reliable sources. --ceradon ( talk  •  contribs ) 05:47, 30 December 2014 (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.