Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lou Renner

 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 delete. Joyous 04:15, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

Lou Renner
Vanity and non-notable. --Woohookitty 21:52, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Google only gets 78 hits for "Lou Renner", most of whom don't seem to be this person. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 21:58, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seems like an interesting fellow, but he doesn't pass the Google test, as indicated already. --Idont Havaname 23:32, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable TigerShark 00:07, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It passed the Google Test for me when I checked it.  mentions a Lou Renner who creates topos that are posted at Pacific Edge climbing gymnasium and then posted in climbing magazines.  mentions a Lou Renner who is a "Santa Cruz climber" and who "makes his living running a successful guiding business and has an impressive record of FA's in the Alps and the Sierras".  Both of these were in the very first page of Google Web results for the name.  Holding a speed record for the ascent of the Jungfrau would appear to establish notablility.  (It's a lot more notable than eating cheeseburgers, at any rate.)  Keep. Uncle G 02:49, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)
 * I created this entry. Given the concern about Lou's notability I have added more information to the page. I question the apparent Google notable test. It would tend to exclude those who have not spent the energy to make themselves known to the world. Lou is such a person. Keep'. DanielWenger
 * Note: This vote is user's first edit. Carrp | Talk 18:11, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Put very simply: An encyclopaedia is a compendium of knowledge. If something, or someone, isn't "known", then they don't belong. Uncle G 05:31, 2005 Feb 12 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. Carrp | Talk 18:10, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I encourage you to contribute more, DanielWenger...but...Wikipedia is not here to make someone notable. Reference works are reflections of what is notable, not creators of notability. --Woohookitty 18:50, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, reads like an ad for a climbing guide. Wyss 20:45, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree that a reference work is not meant to create a notable person. It is Lou's remarkable achievements that make him notable. The lack of reference to him on Google do not diminish from his accomplishments. I do believe that his history and record could be better presented. DanielWenger 00:29, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Then present them better. Cite your sources.  Google is not the only reference that we accept.  Far from it.  But we get a vast amount of biographical articles making all sorts of hyperbolic, or even downright false, claims about people's achievements.  We cannot simply take an article's word for it.  You have added all of this information about the subject.  Tell us, in the article, where you learned that information from.  You must have learned it from somewhere. Uncle G 05:31, 2005 Feb 12 (UTC)
 * Comment. A mountain-climber could be notable, of course. The only mountain-climber whose name I can think of is Edmund Hilary, but that probably only proves that I don't anything about mountain-climbing. What evidence is there that this person is famous in the world of mountain-climbers?   --BM 01:51, 9 Feb 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.