Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robin Miller (businessman)


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 21:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Robin Miller (businessman)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Contested PROD. Reason for my PROD is "Apparently only notable for joining a company and being knighted. Unable to find significant coverage of this person in reliable sources. BBC news link is a WP:ROUTINE news article and the rest appear to be dead." A further WP:BEFORE check yielded nothing additional, however I concede that "Robin Miller" is quite the common name and that my algorithms are likely biased towards Robin Miller (journalist).

The PROD was contested by, citing WP:ANYBIO. Of course, knighthood is a significant honour, however the WP:GNG trumps ANYBIO and the sourcing just doesn't cut it. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (work / talk) 20:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Music, Royalty and nobility, Business, United Kingdom,  and England. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (work / talk) 20:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Although I haven't found a clear slam-dunk example of SIGCOV like an extended biographical profile or book chapter, there is quite a bit of medium-length news coverage, and some book coverage that's a bit more than passing mentions. Examples:
 * There are more in that vein. If it was all coverage of a leadership appointment to a single company, I would vote to redirect, but I think the sum of coverage over his entire career plus the knighthood add up to biographical notability. Jfire (talk) 05:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There are more in that vein. If it was all coverage of a leadership appointment to a single company, I would vote to redirect, but I think the sum of coverage over his entire career plus the knighthood add up to biographical notability. Jfire (talk) 05:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There are more in that vein. If it was all coverage of a leadership appointment to a single company, I would vote to redirect, but I think the sum of coverage over his entire career plus the knighthood add up to biographical notability. Jfire (talk) 05:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There are more in that vein. If it was all coverage of a leadership appointment to a single company, I would vote to redirect, but I think the sum of coverage over his entire career plus the knighthood add up to biographical notability. Jfire (talk) 05:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * There are more in that vein. If it was all coverage of a leadership appointment to a single company, I would vote to redirect, but I think the sum of coverage over his entire career plus the knighthood add up to biographical notability. Jfire (talk) 05:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep Clearly notable having been knighted: WP:ANYBIO "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times"; example of coverage in: the Times, Business big shot: Sir Robin Miller; Independent, The Monday Interview: Rise of a two-headed giant: They may be the odd couple of business, but Gail Counsell finds Emap's chiefs are happy to keep on arguing in the boardroom - Robin Miller and David Arculus Piecesofuk (talk) 13:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. A knighthood very clearly passes WP:ANYBIO #1 and has always been held to do so at AfD. "Apparently only notable for joining a company and being knighted": Why on God's good earth do you think he was knighted? Because he was completely non-notable?! Good grief! Pure lack of understanding of the real world. "the WP:GNG trumps ANYBIO". No. No, it doesn't! Both are notability guidelines. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:27, 23 January 2023 (UTC)-- Necrothesp (talk) 11:27, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ANYBIO is very clearly a WP:SNG and therefore is subordinate to the GNG. Not sure why that at all correlates to a supposed lack of understanding of the real world. Pure garbage comment bordering on personal attack. I expected better from someone with tools. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (work / talk) 17:35, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Then please don't make such ridiculous nominations. It is blatantly obvious that anyone with a knighthood is notable. "Apparently only notable for joining a company and being knighted" is, I'm afraid, one of the silliest comments I've ever seen. Presumably you think knighthoods are given to anyone and everyone. And that he is notable for being knighted, not knighted for being notable. Which clearly does indeed show a lack of understanding. This is not any sort of attack. It's an expression of surprise at the nomination and an exhortation to employ a bit more thought before you nominate an article for deletion in the future. The fact it was deprodded by an experienced editor was a hint. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * "It is blatantly obvious that anyone with a knighthood is notable." this shows an incredibly Anglo-centric worldview and ignores the fact that I legitimately tried to find sources but was unable to. Doubling down on some sort of "lack of understanding of the real world" over this is frankly pathetic and this energy should be spent expanding the article beyond a stub resume/CV instead of continued personal comments / wrongful assumptions about me and what I "think". - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (work / talk) 16:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
 * this shows an incredibly Anglo-centric worldview. No, it really doesn't. People with any equivalent honour are notable anywhere in the world. I have argued this many times. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Withdraw per sources found by . Not going to subject myself to garbage comments from admins any further. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (work / talk) 17:39, 23 January 2023 (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.