Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monroe Trout


 * 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. —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-26 13:00Z 

Monroe Trout

 * — (View AfD)

Being mentioned in a book, is this enough to make this bio's notable? Fails WP:BIO and Notability; see Articles for deletion/Randy McKay (trader), Al Weiss. Seems this is One in a large series of article spam: see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Spam/2006_Archive_Dec. --Hu12 12:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 14:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - "Hedge fund legend" . "...among the best money managers in the world.". Some non-trivial mentions: "Trout Fund clients angered by loss topping $6 million" (Wall Street Journal), CPO Trout buys FCM (Futures magazine).  I think thier is a solid case for passing WP:BIO. ---J.S  (T/C) 16:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, evidently notable(per above) and a typical example of the NET DOES NOT KNOW ALL. In this case notability with 7 ghits Alf photoman 17:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, clearly notable--Ioannes Pragensis 23:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, after a minor rewrite with reliable sources. The Lead section shows notability and the References section should be read by the editors. Just needs even further expansion ASAP. Reason for deletion is no longer valid. There appear to be many separate industry media reference links, that shows there is reasonable industry interest.
 * Meets this criterion from WP:BIO - "The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person."
 * Trade2tradewell 22:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep This is beginning to look like deletion by profession. Not all stock traders are equal.DGG 02:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Keep. I agree with DGG. JamesMLane t c 16:57, 25 December 2006 (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.