Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oliver Pursche


 * 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. Valley2 city ‽ 20:52, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Oliver Pursche

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Coverage—both what's claimed and referenced in the article and what I dug up myself—falls short of establishing notability under WP:GNG and WP:BASIC as it's either connected with the subject or not substantial. Rebb ing   19:29, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Seconded. Additionally, per discussions on the talk page, there appears to be a conflict of interest on the part of the author. Additionally, the author seems to be operating under a single-purpose account, and so I an strongly inclined to believe that the intent behind this article is promotional. --Erick Shepherd (talk) 20:37, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, in case my stance wasn't evident from my last comment. --Erick Shepherd (talk) 16:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I am new to wikipedia so yes my account only has this one solo article for the moment. So yes I am a single purpose account at the moment because we all have to start somewhere. I do not work for or directly with Mr. Pursche, I've never even met the man. I just wanted to added certain financial contributors to Wikipedia with an intent is to spread the word of the importance of financial planning and proper financial education. Mr. Pursche was the first and is one of many I was going to add as I wanted to highlighting the men whom contribute to it. I was also going to do so about certain game changing events in finances, like about Jason Derek Brown or Ross Mandell's company Sky Capital, sort of like the CNBC show American Greed(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Greed). I thought the more the information was readily available the better for everyone. In layman's terms, I was adding this articles for the same reason a fan of Ben Affleck adds an article about him, or a sports fan adds an article about his favorite player. I'm just a huge fan of finances and the good guys in it. I also think everyone should be more aware of the white collar crimes so they hopefully don't fall victim. But at this point I do not want to fight over it, if you feel I am out of line or not breaching a term of service, then I must be doing something incorrectly. So I await to see what you guys decide. If you choose to remove the article then I will just consider it a bad idea and deactivate my account. If you do not then perhaps I can either request someone to write these articles or find out the proper way because clearly, I have no idea what it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KirbyMack (talk • contribs) 21:19, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * - On discussion pages you need to sign your post at the end by putting four tilde's in a row. There's a reminder at the bottom of the edit box (which sometimes scrolls off the bottom of the page). As you have not much experience with Wikipedia, it is too bad that you started out trying to create a new article, because that is the hardest thing you can do here. There are lots of "rules" (called "policies") that govern the content of an article, which you probably haven't learned yet. Although the subject of this article might be a "good guy", Wikipedia requires reliable sources that support notability (as defined in Wikipedia, so you need to read those pages). I'm !voting Delete because the person does not meet general notability and I could not find sources that would support keeping the article. This decision relates to today, and the person could indeed become notable in the future, at which point an article would be possible. LaMona (talk) 01:59, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as simply no convincing signs of a better notable article. SwisterTwister   talk  04:53, 29 March 2016 (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.