Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samuel Scott (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 delete. ✗ plicit  12:13, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Samuel Scott (businessman)

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

No demonstration of notability. Run-of-the-mill businessman. Promotional article, created by the subject himself.

Was up for deletion in June 2021 (no consensus) as Articles for deletion/Samuel Scott (businessperson). Edwardx (talk) 09:48, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Israel. Shellwood (talk) 12:25, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Still nothing notable found since the last discussion to delete. Largely self-promotion. Oaktree b (talk) 13:05, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Great spot Edwardx I'd love to know how this got this far - as nomination says the article was created and edited by the person in question. Massive undeclared COI. Deleting this page isn't sufficient - he should be blocked as an editor! MaskedSinger (talk) 13:56, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, it did go through AFC, so perhaps it should have been picked up at that point. Edwardx (talk) 14:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm finding everything about this peculiar. Could sockpuppets have been involved? MaskedSinger (talk) 06:31, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Thank you, . No evidence of socking here, but if you look at "View history" for Logz.io, Nreatian and KelWright are possible socks for Sjscott80. Looking at Special:Contributions/Nreatian, two of the other articles edited, Ness Digital Engineering and SilverPush look to be of questionnable notability. Edwardx (talk) 09:50, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Ness is a huge IT company in Israel and a strong player also elsewhere. Extremely notable. gidonb (talk) 17:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * He needs to be shut down and these pages need to be scrubbed from Wikipedia. MaskedSinger (talk) 10:04, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm the author and, yes, the subject of the page in question. Please take a look at the Talk page.
 * There, you can see that I submitted the page for review through the proper AFC process and identified my COI. I solicited feedback and made improvements and then resubmitted for the independent review. It was approved independently. The history is all there. 109.64.180.197 (talk) 11:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * And while it is not my place to argue whether I am notable or not because I have an obvious bias, I will refer people to the arguments in the prior debate on this very topic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Samuel_Scott_(businessperson). 109.64.180.197 (talk) 11:46, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You dare talk about proper process where everything about your presence here is a stain on Wikipedia. If you were someone notable and edited your own page, it would be a problem. That you create your own?!?! That you create one for the company you work at?? And you think this is fine. You're a bit too slick for your own good and you've been caught out. Your account/s should be shut down and this page should be salted. MaskedSinger (talk) 14:27, 8 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete did not expect the author to admit it's just an ad for himself. Gabe114 (talk) 14:37, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete (simple). While we absolutely can clean up WP:COI, the subject does not pass the threshold of the WP:GNG. So we can clean up but the article should still be deleted. In other words, the discussion above is not all that relevant. OK, if the person socked, that may still have an impact on other articles. We can review that. But not everything that was written by a sock or in COI has to go. This article does. We should take rational decisions, each article on its merits, and not work from spite. gidonb (talk) 01:18, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Methods aside, subject has inadequate sourcing to meet notability for WP: GNG. Sources are not independent nor reliable. From what I have gleaned from the links posted, in that industry, mentions are potentially standard and not indicative of notability. NiklausGerard (talk) 05:17, 12 April 2022 (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.