Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Schabas


 * 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, rewrite recommended to brush up the quality standard. Deryck C. 23:18, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Michael Schabas

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unreferenced autobiography with arguable notability. It was created by Micheal Schabas himself. If he deserves an article, someone should write one for him, as per WP:AUTO andy4789 ★  ·  (talk?   contribs?)  18:11, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Name gets 16 hits in scholar, 130-ish in google books, most of which seem to be about this person. Haus Talk 19:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOTCV. -- Red rose64 (talk) 19:57, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Not sure what way to vote yet.  But, there are refs about him and his different rail companies. There are 25 news articles that mention him with his companies and a ton of web references.  I added a couple to the article.  Note to submitter, a person can write about themselves, but it is strongly discouraged. It is not grounds for deletion. Bgwhite (talk) 06:13, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete The "couple" of references added to the article both merely mention his name once in passing. No evidence of substantial coverage. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment This is a pet peeve of mine. You obviously have only looked at the article and not have done any research.  There are hundreds of hits in newspapers, web, book and journals that have him mentioned.  I haven't voted one way or the other because I haven't gone thru them all.  I only added the refs to back up the statements in the article as some of the nominators reasons for deleting were a) unreferenced b) COI and thus the article could be making statements that were false or misleading.  Of course if this was a musician, people would be saying keep, but that is a pet peeve for another day.  Bgwhite (talk) 21:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I wonder why I "obviously" have only looked at the article and not have done any research. I wonder how my contribution would have differed had I looked further, found nothing relevant, and therefore had nothing more to say. Of the mentions of him on Google books, we can presumably ignore those he wrote himself, those making one passing mention, a report on a conference, in which his name appears only in a list of names, and is not mentioned otherwise, other sources in which his name appears only in lists of credits, lists of company directors, etc. We are then not left with much, as far as I can see. The only thing among the numerous sources that I checked that was an independent source making more than passing mentions was a report on a British government consultation, in which he gave evidence. In that case there are several mentions of his name, but they scarcely contribute substantial coverage about him. Merely saying that there are many mentions of him without consideration of the nature of those mentions does nothing to establish notability. However, perhaps you have better sources than I have been able to find, since you must have used something more effective at finding mentions in books than Google books, because you say there are "hundreds of hits", but Google books produces only one hundred and thirty eight. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete After going thru the refs: He was a rail owner in England, currently a part-owner of a railroad in Germany, is a transportation expert, publisher of articles in transportation journals, was an adviser on the EuroTunnel and railprojects Australia, Africa, Germany, and England. However, none of these refs ever go into detail about Mr. Schabas.  Without "significant coverage" per WP:GNG, he doesn't pass the nobility test. Bgwhite (talk) 01:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - apparently notable railway executive management - This person's opinion and experience is taken as valuble in reliable third party publications that I would expect to be beyond reproach - ie see the google books results - (not the usual self published crap) includes stuff like Institution of Civil Engineers and witness to UK parliament. Consistent activity and associated with several notable firms that still exist - not flash in pan. Archive web news search also reveals coverage as promoter/manager of several schemes eg Die Welt, Telegraph, The Independent and reliable rail industry publications.
 * What needs to be looked at is the article - I don't see any real evidence of promotion - has it actually been established that the creator is the subject?
 * In terms of simple rules based notability "The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field" -check  - created or founded more than one successful and notable railway business - and receives repeated recognition for it in press.
 * Article needs checking and referencing, plus double check for any negative news missed.Mddkpp (talk) 09:07, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Comment I found this odd piece http://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/5306/ about a business transaction of GB Railways (subject was a key board member) - I haven't made full sense of it yet, but it shows that a more thorough look at the situation might be needed -this isn't even mentioned in GB Railways yet Edelaraudtee claims they are still owners!!Mddkpp (talk) 10:51, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That is a bit odd, although I did also happen to notice the article itself is from Aug 09, 2001. SaveATreeEatAVegan 20:09, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge with GB Railways although with less mention as there is little about him outside of that company. Simply south...... having large explosions for 5 years 21:37, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep The founder of a major firm is part of the "enduring historical record". History includes the history of business enterprises, and most certainly the history of infrastructure such as railroads.  There is strong possibility for expansion, as the man has done other things, and may go on to do more. Successful businessmen usually do.  DGG ( talk ) 03:16, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 13:07, 7 February 2012 (UTC)




 * Keep - My sense is that Wikipedia is better with this article than without it, although this is obviously a very borderline notability situation. Carrite (talk) 16:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per DGG's reasoning; merger to GB Railways is also possible, but his significance seems to go beyond that one company. --Arxiloxos (talk) 18:33, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. This is a substantial figure in the UK rail industry. I should have thought he was notable just on the strength of the articles and papers he has written, but even leaving those aside, he has played an important part in several developments. You would not necessarily find these in Google hits because by no means everything is on line. Modern Railways for instance is the leading UK railway industry periodical and it is not on line. He has often appeared in it for one reason or another. We need to beware of the false idea that "if it's not on the internet, it didn't happen". -- Alarics (talk) 22:00, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - the article strongly needs an article/biography/interview with Schabas - if you (or anyone else) can find one can you print out the volume/issue number/date on the articles talk page. Although there are lot of good internet sources on this persons activities there doesn't seem to be a "1 on 1" interview or mini-bio which is so valuable for a biography article.Mddkpp (talk) 11:14, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Remember WP:VNT, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is based on verifiability, not truth. So even if a fact about him is true, there needs to be reliable sources to prove that. The internet is the most efficient way of obtaining sources, so that's why there may be a slight lean towards that statement you made. Not everyone can go around reading every book in the universe until they find one with Micheal Schabas in it, a Google search is miles easier as most things are online nowadays (ie Google books). The sources and books found online mostly only include a brief mention of him, which is why this case is in my opinion, a person of borderline notability. That's why I brought it here. -- andy4789 ★ ·  (talk?   contribs?)  21:04, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Whilst not the most notable person his, influences are wide spread throughout the transport industry. Given that he has moved onto different things I don't feel it right to merge him with GB Railways. LongRobin79(talk) 10:57, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - although I've been following the UK rail industry for the best part of 20 years, this name doesn't ring any bells. Lamberhurst (talk) 17:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment In that case you cannot have been reading the railway press very attentively. -- Alarics (talk) 17:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Before jumping to conclusions, a simple check of his own published list of papers shows that only one article in Modern Railways was published (over 11 years ago). Lamberhurst (talk) 17:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That is by no means his most recent appearance in Modern Railways. He has been reported and/or discussed there on for instance his leading role in Superlink (railway network), the proposal for an alternative to (or more ambitious version of) Crossrail. -- Alarics (talk) 20:59, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * But is there proof of this? Per WP:OR, you can't just say "he's been in 10 magazines in the past 5 years" for example without citing where you got that fact from. -- andy4789 ★ ·  (talk?   contribs?)  21:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think that is helpful - there is no reason to think that anyone is making stuff up - eg WP:AGF. Though I agree that internet sources are preferable - paper literature can be easy to access for some people - but not so much if you live in a different country. It is annoying when an universally accessible source isn't given (as it is not possible to check that an incorrect interpretation has been given - which does happen) - but that doesn't affect the validity of paper sources in any way.Mddkpp (talk) 21:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I never said I thought anyone was making anything up, I just stated that WP:OR is an important policy to remember when making claims such as that. I have no doubt that Alarics is telling the truth. WP:AAGF ;) -- andy4789 ★ ·  (talk?   contribs?)  22:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I was able to find quite easily "Michael Schabas and Mark Causebrook join First Class Partnerships" vol 65 (2008) and "Schabas goes for open access" vol 66 (2009) which are more recent.Mddkpp (talk) 21:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If you ask me Bob Crow is not worthy of a mention in wikipedia, yet someone has taken time out to include him, the argument here is should Michael Schabas have a wikipedia entry. Yes I agree he's not the most well known rail figure and there are not many internet sources about him. He is at best a weak keep but remember that someone took the time to include him and we're all here debating him, therefore he must have something about him? LongRobin79(talk) 21:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately the "someone who took the time to include him" appears to have been Michael Schabas himself, which is frowned upon of course, but, as was pointed out earlier, that in itself is not a sufficient reason for deletion if the case for notability stands up none the less. As for "internet sources are preferable", that seems to be tantamount to saying that paper-only sources are inferior, which I thought was supposed to be a heresy to say on WP. At all events, as I pointed out earlier, when it comes to UK railway industry matters the most authoritative source, Modern Railways, is not on line at all. As it happens I possess a complete run of it since 1972 and I could no doubt find several Schabas items if I had time but at present I don't. -- Alarics (talk) 22:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Is this gentleman the same subject in question? If so, I'm surprised I don't see any of this information included in the article as well.  SaveATreeEatAVegan 08:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * He's a http://www.firstclasspartnerships.com/who-we-are.php associate of that firm, so it's not an independent source. Mr. Schabas appears quite good at ringing his own bell - perhaps we should invite him to complete his own article .. ;) Mddkpp (talk) 10:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Aha! I also noticed while searching a copy of his resume.  Not sure how outdated it is...looks pretty impressive if you ask me though!  According to this, he's been involved recently with a high speed rail project in the United States.  SaveATreeEatAVegan</b> 20:28, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, but it needs a serious rewrite to meet WP:NPOV. He meets notability as others have commented, but the article POV is strongly in his favor. - Jorgath (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep the article, remove the tags as it now appears to have been rewritten with a better neutral point of view. - I included another citation within the article that verifies him as a founder of GB Railways Group. He also played leading roles in the development of Vancouver Skytrain, the London Docklands Light Railway, Jubilee Line Extension, and Britain’s first High Speed Railway (the Channel Tunnel Rail Link).  Regardless of whether or not he was the article's creator, he's notable.  <b style="color:green">SaveATree</b><b style="color:orange">EatAVegan</b> 20:04, 17 February 2012 (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.