Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Mead


 * 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 no consensus. (NPASR) (non-admin closure)  Rcsprinter123    (confer)  @ 16:25, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Scott Mead

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I can't find any substantial coverage of the subject in RS. The article states he is a photographer but this coverage in the low-quality Evening Standard was the best I could find. (Note that a different Scott Mead is more notable as a photographer ). Similarly I can only find brief mentions of his career at Goldman Sachs e.g. in The FT or in relation to his PA stealing from him. Unless there are sources that I haven't been able to find WP:BIO isn't met. SmartSE (talk) 20:56, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 21:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 03:48, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment: SmartSE's nomination is excellent and I can't see any fault in it. The only reason I have for hesitating to agree with a call for deletion is a feeling that somebody might wonder just who are these somewhat shadowy names that pop up as trustees of The Photographers' Gallery, etc. Because the author of the excellent Anatomy of Britain is now dead, publication of Son of Who Runs This Place? The Anatomy of Britain a Bit Further into the 21st Century seems unlikely. I'm not certain that Wikipedia should be doing this job, but I'd be reassured if I knew that some website somewhere was doing it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:28, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Hi SmartSE and Hoary,I edited this entry in the past, and saw it's considered for deletion now for being written in a promotional style etc. So I made some edits to try to improve it. Can you let me know what you think please? BenSalo (talk) 14:02, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The promotional tone is pretty irrelevant if he isn't notable, which is what this discussion is about. As the note I left on your talk page notes, if you are being paid to edit the article then you must disclose this, including who your employer is. SmartSE (talk) 14:17, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ☮ JAaron95  Talk   12:12, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:22, 28 August 2015 (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.