Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tobias Gondrom


 * 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. Will move to userspace upon request. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:36, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Tobias Gondrom

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * BLP failing WP:GNG - no secondary sources, combined with promo SPA creator, prev deleted years ago for promo, salting is an option...
 * PROD removal is unconvincing
 * from WP:SPA editor presum undisclosed COI "this article is in line with other articles on IETF leaders for documentation, I keep it intentionally minimal, similar to Russ Housley, Harald Tveit Alvestrand. It is not intended as Promotion for OWASP or IETF, simply as neutral reference"
 * They also appear to be borderline N, or non-notable (COI and/or promo), and WP:OTHERSTUFF applies. Widefox ; talk 21:40, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I am new to Wiki. Only write little text, to try out. I think this article is in line with other articles on IETF leaders for documentation, I make it intentionally simple,minimal. I used other pages as idea how to write. So I write similar to pages on Russ Housley, Harald Tveit Alvestrand and others. Maybe this is not good way? It is not intended as Promotion for OWASP or IETF, simply as neutral reference. I think the leaders are good to know because they are responsible. And they also do many good things for the Internet. So I think it is good to mention them.

And I think both organisations for IETF and OWASP are important and should be mentioned in Wiki. I see that you want to delete the OWASP page as well. I do not think this is right. But maybe Wiki pages do not mention organisations anymore? Maybe you can help improve the text of the page?

I do not understand the text of "no secondary sources" or "salting is an option"? Can you maybe help improve the page?

Many greetings, Xu (Xhowiet)
 * Read WP:OTHERSTUFF. You have a COI for OWASP, correct? See WP:COI. Widefox ; talk 01:57, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete – fails WP:GNG, and obviously WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument. sst✈(discuss) 15:44, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:35, 7 December 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as he seems to have gotten some coverage for his work, yes, but there's nothing to suggest better solid independent notability for an article....so delete for now at best and draft and userfy only if needed. SwisterTwister   talk  06:19, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. The administrative positions listed in the article are not automatically notable, but could be notable per WP:GNG if enough in-depth reliable third-party coverage specifically about Gondrom or his accomplishments could be located. However the sources currently listed in the article are not good enough and web searching didn't turn up anything better. I also didn't see enough academic impact for his publications to pass WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:35, 21 December 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.