Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sean McGrath (author)


 * 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. The consensus below is that subject of this article does not meet the standard of WP:AUTHOR or have sufficient coverage to be notable under the WP:GNG. Eluchil404 (talk) 04:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Sean McGrath (author)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Bio, almost certainly autobio, with no attempt made to demonstrate notability. Also a redirect at Sean McGrath, CTO and Author. &mdash; Sgroupace (talk) 21:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep? Has written 3 published books. North8000 (talk) 22:52, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That is not a valid keep reason by WP:AUTHOR. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 03:21, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 7 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - None of his books that he wrote or his accomplishments make him notable. Per WP:AUTHOR. --Michaelzeng7 (talk - contribs) 01:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: Non-notable author. No notable books. SL93 (talk) 21:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter  (gas)  11:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep He may have some notability. His books are published by a major publisher (Prentice-Hall), and he himself gets some coverage at Google News. Examples: Infoworld describes him as a "notable expert" here and quotes him here. SiliconRepublic gives him a paragraph here and a couple of paragraphs here. Sys-Con quotes him here. Granted these are not "significant" coverage but they do suggest some degree of notability. The article needs a serious rewrite, to cite some of these sources, and to get rid of the jargon and acronyms to make it clearer what he does. --MelanieN (talk) 15:26, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. As noted above, any coverage of him is not significant, and I'd rather delete this promotional content than keep it around in the faint hope that somebody rewrites it neutrally based on what scant sources there are.  Sandstein   08:29, 14 April 2012 (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.