Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Thomas (mining executive)


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 11:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Peter Thomas (mining executive)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

non notable person, fails Notability (people). The article has an unsourced claim the subject recieved a Churchill Scholarship though the WP article says that its for US citizens the subject is Australian. Gnangarra 15:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * changed the article from Churchill scholarship to Menzies Scholarship to Harvard as per comment on article talk page, still unsourced and according to the Menzies Foundation Web site there isnt a listing for the subject. Gnangarra 02:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   —Gnangarra 16:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.   —Gnangarra 16:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Thin resumé for a non-notable CFO with no authoritative external sourcing of notability. Of the four sources that are cited, two are basically directory entries (Newington College Register; Newsweek - not a Newsweek article, an "Executive Profile" directory type entry), one is the site of the company he works for, and one is a paper source (that's fine) that appears to be about his college (Newington Across the Years). He doesn't appear to have published anything, killed anyone, played on the national rugby squad, recorded with a band, or invented anything of note. Solid, absolutely non-notable Aussie. --Quartermaster (talk) 18:03, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Reads like a CV.Tinminer (talk) 21:14, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete This article is a whole-of-life biography of its subject.  It does not focus on any particular notability of the subject.  WP:NOTMYSPACE says WP is not a social network and should not be used as an alternative to www.facebook.com or similar.  The sponsors of this article should transfer it to one of the many social networks on the internet.  Dolphin51 (talk) 23:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. LinkedIn would be an appropriate destination for this content. Murtoa (talk) 00:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable as the CFO of a major Australian mining company in the middle of a resources boom. All senior executives of Fortescue should have bios on wikipedia not just the boss who is now Australia's richest man. These people are changing the face of WA and the economy. Castlemate (talk) 03:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Thomas's personal impact on WA or the economy is best measured (at least in Wikipedia terms) by the amount of coverage he has attracted in significant, reliable, third party sources. And apart from small news bites when he has changed companies, there is very little in that regard. Google News is a reasonable barometer of coverage, and it appears to turn up next to nothing.  He may work for a big company, but in terms of his personal notability, based on verifiable evidence, he appears to fall short. Murtoa (talk) 04:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - non-notable.-- Lester  12:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Thomas is well known in the Australian resources business while google news may not list many citations, it should not be regarded as any measure of notability. The media spokespeople of large companies are not necessarily the movers and shakers.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.253.176 (talk) 12:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment While Google News should not be relied upon exclusively as a measure of notability, for someone in a business field like Thomas it is a helpful and relevant gauge of coverage in reliable, third party publications such as business pages of metropolitan dailies. By this measure, which I suggest is reasonable, he fails on notability grounds. Murtoa (talk) 05:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  23:58, 3 September 2008 (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.