Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myogauge Corp.


 * 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. This discussion is solely on whether to include the article Myogauge Corp. in Wikipedia. Consensus is to delete this article. Something about Stanley Kaplan is for another discussion. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  21:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Myogauge Corp.

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

This article fails WP:GNG, WP:CORP and WP:NRVE. ITasteLikePaint (talk) 01:20, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment I am the creator of this page. I feel as though it is objective and factual and does not contain promotional language.  All of the claims made here are legitimate and I can substantiate everything.  I do work for the company, but I feel as though any conflict of interest is a moot point as long as the article is written in an unbiased factual way.  Someone who is a part of a company needs to be able to help explain their product.  The Myogauge is a real technology and is fast becoming generally accepted.  I am also interested in giving credit to the inventor and CEO Stanley Kaplan for his contributions to multiple industries and sciences.  I would not be apposed to turning this entry into a more biographical article and renaming it if that makes it less questionable.  I am a huge advocate and fan of Wikipedia.  I fully understand and appreciate the rules.  In this case I do not feel as though I have broken any rules. Csbruggers (talk) 01:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Even though I may be involved in the company now, at one time I was a third party looking in. I became involved with Myogauge and with Stan Kaplan because of their legitimacy and integrity.  One of the Wikipedia guidelines is that a third party must find enough merit in the subject to write an article unsolicited.  Well I was so impressed with the subject matter that I asked to be involved with it full time, and I am not currently getting paid for my work.  How much better of a third party endorsement can you get?  How different would it really be if I chose to write this article before I accepted a title?  This is not autobiographical either.  I am writing about someone else's accomplishments.Csbruggers (talk) 02:12, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - per nom. My good faith searches are unable to uncover significant coverage in reliable independent sources.  To Csbruggers, there is no Wikipedia guidelines that says "a third party must find enough merit in the subject to write an article unsolicited".  The requirement is, instead, "significant coverage in reliable independent sources".  There is no evidence your article is either "reliable", "independent", or, for that matter, "coverage".  Please see WP:N for our notability guidelines. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:32, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems like our discussion is mostly in regards to Myogauge itself, am I right? I am more interested at this stage in seeing an article about Stanley Kaplan.  I would be happy to move the article to one about Stanley instead and make Myogauge a subsection of that article.  This way it would be a secondary biographical article about a noteworthy inventor and not about a company written by one of its members.  I can direct you to patent filings with the US government that contain his name and the name of his earlier company which would correspond to products that are still widely used.  If you agree with this proposition please assist me in doing this.  I am an admitted newcomer to Wikipedia editing.  I ask only that the community bear with me and help me make this as acceptable of an entry as possible through proper editing.  Thanks.  Csbruggers (talk) 02:49, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply - Presuming that the Stanley Kaplan you are referring to is not the Stanley Kaplan we already have an article about then I am unable to find any evidence whatsoever that your Mr Kaplan is notable within the Wikipedia meaning of the term. Please carefully read our policies on notability and the five pillars of Wikipedia and then consider whether Wikipedia is the right place for this information.  Not everything that you are interested in, or that other people may potentially be interested in, belongs on Wikipedia. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:54, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No it is not the same Stanley Kaplan. You should actually read the article you are discussing, I say that specifically.  Are you suggesting that you are interested in everything that makes it onto Wikipedia then?  Isn't it interesting that just about every building in the United States built after 1965 makes use of his inventions?  I am pretty sure the Wikipedia guidelines talks specifically about your preposition of interest, in favor of the article.  It says you shouldn't base your criteria for nomination under the Articles of Deletion on whether you are interested in the topic, but on the quality of the information.  Wikipedia is meant to be a collaboration of all human knowledge.  How many people do you know who have made such a large contribution to a single industry over a 60 year career, who is still inventing and starting companies at the age of 82?  I suggest that this Stanley Kaplan is worthy of coverage as a noteworthy inventor and American Industrialist.  As I said, I can provide evidence of his ownership of all those patents, and his being the Founder and President of Unifast Industries for over 30 years, from 1958 until 1988.  Unifast Industries was a multimillion dollars international manufacturing company and was once traded on the New York Stock Exchange.  I have spoken to people older than myself who were customers and investors in this company.  It becomes very hard to provide web based references for an organization that existed in its entirety before the dawn of the internet. Csbruggers (talk) 03:06, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply - I read both articles, plus anchor bolt. I am unable to find any evidence that Stanley Kaplan is the inventor of the anchor bolt. Once again, all you need do is provide significant coverage in reliable independent sources establishing the notability of the topic. As you can imagine, a very large number of people start articles on Wikipedia every day with the sole intention of publicising their unremarkable businesses and products. Wikipedia is not an advertising service, and so it is important to establish clear guidelines on what articles are and are not acceptable. Every other article on Wikipedia is required to pass the guidelines at WP:N; this is not a personal attack on you, Mr Kaplan, or Myogauge. Either you can find significant coverage in reliable independent sources for your topic, or you can't, and that is the end of the matter. PLEASE NOTE: your references need not be "web-based". See WP:RS for our policy on reliable sources and WP:CITE for how to cite them.  You can use contemporary books and periodicals; the only requirement is that they be cited in sufficient detail for another editor to check them.  For offline sources a short quote of the relevant material is also helpful. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:16, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay, please give me a little more time to organize some sources of reference to this effect. It will not be hard. I have access to a stack of patent issue documents. I also have a stack of annual reports from Unifast. Myogauge may seem unremarkable at this time simply because it is fairly new, but it is soon to be a household name. I assure you that the technology is noteworthy and plenty of independent parties are accepting it. Unifast and Stan Kaplan's life story is anything but unremarkable. I could find dozens of articles about people who are far less accomplished than he is. I will provide links to the patent office website to show he is the inventor of the common wedge and expansion anchor. I will also find a way to provide the annual reports and SEC filings from Unifast with his name on them. Please let me know if this would be a sufficient breadth of reference. Csbruggers (talk) 03:30, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete: -- I was the first to propose this page for deletion, and I can't see this AGF contributor understands the basics of Wikipedia. There is absolutely nothing to confirm notability and no references at all. --Fama Clamosa (talk) 03:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

If you move to delete an article about Stanley Kaplan you would have to delete any article about any other businessperson, innovator, or inventor. You are failing to allow for the fact that his noteworthiness is less aparant on the internet because much of it was prior to the dawn of the internet. When you are making claims about historical figures there is a certain about of faith that needs to come with it. I am offering to provide evidence of his prior fame and noteworthiness but it's going to take a few more days. I am very clear on the basics of Wikipedia. I spend as much as three hours a day reading articles. This is just my first real contribution. I am willing to provide documentation as to Stan Kaplan's notoriety based on the values present in any other article about a person who's made similar contributions to human knowledge, who are granted Wikipedia pages. There is an air of hostility in these commentators posts that does not seem in line with the spirit of Wikipedia. Please try and keep an open mind. This is not self promotion, this is a legitimate attempt to bring to light a person whose amazing life story has yet to be recorded on the web. Csbruggers (talk) 03:22, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 04:06, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Myogauge does not appear to have received any significant coverage in reliable sources. Regarding CSBruggers' request to create an article about the company's founder, I suggest that he create the article in his user space (e.g. at User:Csbruggers/Stanley Kaplan (entrepreneur)) and request feedback from some experience editors prior to moving that article to mainspace.  Whether or not Kaplan is notable, this company is not.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Here is a link I just added that leads to a bank of old PR NewsWires containing Stanley's name as President of Unifast Industries: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-6162450.html. I am not opposed to changing the name of this article to Stanley Kaplan(Entrepreneur). Myogauge may not be noteworthy enough yet to have its own page, but Stanley certainly is. Myogauge can be a subsection of the article on him. Part of what makes Stan remarkable is that he has over twenty patents to his name and is still starting companies at the age of 82. He has Myogauge as well as The Wedge King. Csbruggers (talk) 14:38, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Here are some links to the patents associated with his inventions: These patents go back to 1962. Csbruggers (talk) 14:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=SKEtAAAAEBAJ&dq=Stanley+Kaplan
 * http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=8hs1AAAAEBAJ&dq=Stanley+Kaplan
 * http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=BdRLAAAAEBAJ&dq=Stanley+Kaplan
 * Comment Irrelevant. This discussion is not about Kaplan's notability; it is about Myogauge's.  Please restrict comments in this AFD to the topic at hand.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

This conversation is about both Stanley Kaplan as an inventor and about Myogauge. I have already agreed to change the name of the article to Stanley Kaplan(Entrepreneur)or Stanley Kaplan(Industrialist)/(Inventor) whatever. If someone would show me how to do that I would do it now and drop the case about Myogauge as it's own article. As I continue to search I am coming up with endless links like that to patents for anchor bolts and expansion anchors that he invented. Originally I was only trying to get Stanley recognized for his contributions to the science of Anchor Bolts. Csbruggers (talk) 15:04, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply Please see my comments on your talk page. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:34, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

To everyone involved in this conversation, I am now working on a User article entitled Stanley Kaplan (Entrepreneur). So far as references, I am providing patent links with Stan's name on them dating back to 1962, and links to press releases dating back to Unifast Industries and American Body Armor, which should prove that Stanley all but created the business of anchor bolts, wedge anchors, expansion anchors, toggle anchors, etc, and also contributed heavily to the establishment of reliable body armor used extensively by the US Government.

Please read my talk page for longer explanations of Stan's involvement in these sciences and what prompted him to innovate the way he did. He also has a patent on record just filed for in 2010 which proves that he is continuing to innovate even at the age of 82. I spoke to Stan today. We demonstrated Myogauge for a large multi-state health and fitness organization based in New York who loved it. He is going to spend a little time writing a short autobiography, a history of Unifast Industries, and a history leading up to the creation of American Body Armor, and also the details of the founding of Myogauge. My goal is to have a section for each of these businesses as well as a personal history of Stan.

Feel free to check in on my article as it develops and give me feedback in the talk section as I go. Stanley Kaplan deserves recognition for his 60 year career as an innovator and inventor and I intend to make sure that happens. Thanks for all your help and feedback as I try to learn how to write for Wikipedia. I am an avid reader and now I plan to be an avid contributor. I see Wikipedia as one of the most important record keeping projects on earth. I understand and appreciate all the rules. Csbruggers (talk) 21:54, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Searching just by "Myogauge" reveals absolutely nothing towards establishing notability. There are only 239 Google results. Abductive  (reasoning) 14:37, 30 November 2010 (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.