Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paulo Taylor


 * 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:20, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Paulo Taylor

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only claim to fame is co-creating eBuddy, but notability is not inherited, and it doesn't seem like he's done anything else of note. Iago Qnsi (talk) 22:33, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

DELETE. Certainly lacks any notability. 71.185.45.31 (talk) 00:58, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello (talk), as it is explained in the articles I refer to as sources, Paulo Taylor did indeed co-found the company eBuddy, but the app eBuddy was solely developed by Paulo Taylor, as he was the programer, and the other two co-founders had other functions within the company that were not related to programming.

What do you mean by "notability is not inherited"? Paulo Taylor came from a humble family, do you mean I should remove his parents names? (because that fact doesn't add anything to his biography?

Many thanks, Josinemonalisa (talk) 12:57, 4 March 2016 (UTC)josinemonalisa
 * By "notability is not inherited", I mean, just because Taylor was involved with something notable doesn't automatically make him notable. He may be the sole developer of eBuddy, but that doesn't mean that he himself is notable. Taylor must meet the notability guidelines by his own merits, not by merely being connected to another notable subject. See this section about arguments to avoid for more info. - Iago Qnsi (talk) 01:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  15:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  15:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as none of this established solid independent notability and there's nothing else convincing from the current article. SwisterTwister   talk  05:30, 5 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.