Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Eivind Hall


 * 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. The particiapnts here are about evenly split, which normally results in a no consensus result, but I was quite close to calling this a delete anyway. Many of the keep voters point to the sources, but looking at the sources shows that Gene93k's analysis is mostly correct, the sources seem to be more about the company, and some of them make no mention of the CEO at all. Nonetheless, I am closing this with no consensus because NJ Wine pointed out the presence of a Bloomberg Businessweek profile which does feature Hall in a short descriptive text. I myself remain unconvinced whether such a short profile is sufficient basis for notability and a biography (had I voted, it would probably be for deletion), but it isn't a ridiculous argument either, so I will give this article the benefit of the doubt. Sjakkalle (Check!)  19:38, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

William Eivind Hall

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Another editor has declined a speedy deletion for this company executive, apparently because his company is notable. A similar article was apparently previously speedy deleted. There doesn't seem to be any in-depth coverage about Hall, the Sydney Morning Herald article (cited in the new article) merely mentions Hall briefly. He may be an executive of a notable company but he does not meet WP:GNG notability requirements himself. People do not inherit notability from the company that employs them, do they? Sionk (talk) 19:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. This article wasn't suitable for an A7 speedy delete: being CEO of a company like this one should certainly enough to meet A7's "indication of importance" requirement. A7 specifically notes that this is a lower standard than notability.  Now, as to notability, the question appears to be more subtle.  For the moment I'd only note that the great majority of references refer to him as "Bill Hall" and so sifting takes a lot of time. --Arxiloxos (talk) 19:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep ::He was CEO and Chairman,. I agree just being an  executive   isn't notable, nor just being on the executive board.  and I wouldn't even necessarily consider it a credible claim to importance. ANd this was one of  the most important chemical engineering firm in the world, not just a barely notable company.  DGG ( talk ) 20:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems like there's enough coverage of the guy to warrant having a page. (Plus, the guy's a war hero! Cut the guy a break, Sionk! Sorry, j/k, not really the reason I voted keep;) ).    Joel Why?  talk  20:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:BIO states the following: "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." The article contains multiple independent sources, and it was easy for me to find additional ones. NJ Wine (talk) 21:32, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - why was the article previously speedy deleted if the guy was notable? Why is there not an article on Parsons Energy & Chemicals, if this was such a notable division (as DGG claims)? Where are the reliable indepth sources about Hall - there is one sentence on an Oil and Gas Industry website and one and half sentences in the Sydney Morning Herald?! Hall certainly wasn't the subject of either source. This guy is a senior businessman in the modern age of the internet, so one would expect to find coverage about him if he was notable. Sionk (talk) 22:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 *  Undecided Delete. The current references, as Sionk points out, are not about Hall, but about the company, in which he is either named as its head or gives a comment. I can't seem to find anything about him personally other than the Bloomberg bio, and that's more in the way of a directory listing. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:59, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. The logs show that this page (with this exact title) was speedied not once but 3 times since 2006. Guess there must have been some good reason to do so.TMCk (talk) 00:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. At the time of my writing, none of the 5 citations give that CEO any notability on his own, (one being a dead link). A company can be quite notable but that doesn't mean that any person in such cooperation has a notability by default. That "3-day-forum" link sure doesn't do it either. And if he's notable as a war hero as suggested than by all means create an article based on this, although I very much doubt that is possible.TMCk (talk) 00:00, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:14, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't find him notable. The article says he is currently "an executive" at WorleyParsons, a notable company, but his role doesn't seem to be important enough to be listed at the Wikipedia article or at Bloomberg. The article gives his main claim to fame as the fact that from 2000 to 2004 he was CEO and chairman of Parsons Energy & Chemicals - which was not a freestanding company but a division of Parsons Corporation. I find nothing about him at Google News under William Eivind Hall. Leaving out his middle name and adding "Parsons" supplies only this from the company website. --MelanieN (talk) 23:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * P.S. The fact that this article has been deleted three times previously makes me wonder if it should be salted - if the result is delete. --MelanieN (talk) 17:24, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Here is an article on him from the LA Times. There may be more, but I don't have time to look at the moment.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 10:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete The sources are really about the company. There are some mini-biographies on some sites due to his current position but I've not found anything in-depth (nor in the references in the article as it stands) that would suggest he has notability independent of his role in this company. Whouk (talk) 12:24, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep :: Chemical engineers tend to not make the news, but when they do why should they not be included in wikipeida.org? How many chemical engineers make wikipedia when there are thousands of athletes and actors who make the news because their professions depend on media attention while engineers who lead a company into a merger making it a leader in their field do not? He has mutliple internet references and there is a print news article from the late 1980's that I am digging up. He was/is a noted engineer turned head of an engineering company that merged with an Australian company making it one of the largest chemical engineering company's in the world. His professional name is Bill Hall so that makes searching online more time consuming but there are more references to him with this name''' J341933  —Preceding undated comment added 20:55, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The references are what will make or break this nomination, so please do let us know what you find. My own search using his name as Bill Hall did not turn up much. Google News Archive found only three passing mentions. Even the company's own website history does not mention him. --MelanieN (talk) 14:17, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * there is no requirement for in-depth coverage, which is a good thing, because that is pretty much undefinable. There is a requirement for substantial coverage--perhaps that is not really definable either, but it's less than "in depth". Myself, I think a reasonable guideline is thatthe CEO of a notable company is notable when there is sufficient information.  DGG ( talk ) 06:02, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note that this subject was never CEO of a notable company. He was CEO Of Parsons Energy & Chemicals, which was a division of a notable company, Parsons Corporation. --MelanieN (talk) 20:41, 17 June 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.