Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheila mikhail


 * 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. Consensus is that she isn't sufficiently notable. TravellingCari 17:10, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Sheila mikhail

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

Although she is a CEO there are only 406 Google hits. I'm not too familiar with the inclusion criteria for CEOs and people of this nature, and it's not speediable due to claim of notability. mboverload @ 22:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC) ''A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.
 * If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability.
 * Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject.''


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  20:01, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Protonk (talk) 16:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - the article includes a reference to a Triangle Business Journal article that is about her rather than just quoting her about her company. In addition, a google search turned up this News Observer article where she is the primary subject of the article.  There are sufficient reliable sources covering her to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:33, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite 18:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete whether a CEO is notable depends on what they area cEO of--in this case it seems to be "NanoCor Therapeutics, which is in the process of developing ..." that in process is sufficient to show no present notability. DGG (talk) 22:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Being a CEO of a company only establishes notability if the company is itself notable — and we currently don't have articles on any of her companies: neither Life Sciences Law, nor Asklepios BioPharmaceutical, nor NanoCor Therapeutics. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 09:49, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Advertising, actually, and generally publicizing a company that is in a very competitive area.  No indications whatsoever that the firms or person stand out from the pack.  Utgard Loki (talk) 16:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Forming a company is not an accomplishment, any more than starting a marathon is. Jclemens (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete not notable; promotional Tom Harrison Talk 17:52, 16 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.