Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Herp (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Draftify. Moved to Draft:Linear Air. Randykitty (talk) 11:47, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

William Herp

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Main claim of credibility seems to be Linear Air. While notability cannot be inherited I am not sure that Linear Air itself is notable under WP:CORP. While he has received coverage in a number of private jet industry magazines, as well as at least one alumni magazine coverage, I would suggest none of these are WP:RS. He therefore does not meet GNG or any other standards for notability as I see it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:21, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Question: can you explain why you don't consider the industry magazines to be reliable? —Compassionate727 (T·C) 17:30, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, Page Curation handled that nomination improperly, it should have created a second page instead of adding to the old one. I'll investigate and probably file a task at Phabricator. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 17:42, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Definitely a fair question. An industry magazine can obviously be highly reliable or basically semi-paid for content. I will admit I didn't do a fully study of RS, as they are sources I'm not immediately familiar with, but instead relied on comments I'd read at the previous AfD (thanks for the bug report). Something which I hadn't discovered until now is that it appears despite the previous AfD being marked closed by the page was never actually deleted. I will comment that the page as it exists today is not substantially different from the version which was deleted. If I had originally noticed this I might have tagged G4 (which is admittedly not a tag I'd seriously examined before in my relatively nascent NPP work). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:49, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Looking over said AfD, I'm not particularly impressed by what I saw. Two delete votes, one comment that leaned towards delete, and 1 keep. The only one who made arguments referring to policy was the keep, . I'll take a look at the sources myself in a little bit, but I'm not particularly inclined to agree with the results of that AfD (I would have closed it as no consensus) or use it as precedent in this one. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 21:29, 26 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete: an unremarkable entrepreneur. Does not meet WP:ANYBIO & significant RS coverage not found. Coverage is in passing and / or WP:SPIP. Reads like a promotional CV. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Alright, now I'm seeing it. Coverage is trivial. Speedy delete per CSD G4. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 23:43, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Procedural note: viewing the page log, the article was restored after deletion and moved to User:Silver seren's userspace. After very minor additions by User:Daask (but enough to IMO disqualify the page from G4), User:Compassionate727 moved the page back to mainspace. ansh 666 23:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Ugh, fine then. Delete per nom. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 23:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Move to Draft:Linear Air I stumbled across what looked like a nearly-finished draft and sought to improve it enough to get it into mainspace. After realizing it had gone through a deletion discussion, looking for sources, and considering further, I agreed that Herp wasn't notable and abandoned the effort. That said, I think Linear Air probably is notable. See some additional sources I added in the further reading section and some additional notes I posted to the talk page here. If y'all don't think Linear Air is notable, I don't care that much. Daask (talk) 02:06, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 05:12, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * While the nom questions whether Linear Air is notable (a statement made with only cursory research) given sources found by Daask I now agree that it is notable. However, not sure I follow moving this page there given that they are distinct topics. Sure move the Linear Air section and start the article from there. Best, Barkeep49 (talk)


 * I feel like I've flipped positions far too many times on this one. Hopefully this is the last: move to Draft:Linear Air per . I agree based on the sourcing here that Linear Air is probably notable. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 10:16, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Do Whatever You Want I'd given up on Wikipedia several years back for a reason. I make edits here and there if I notice something, but I decided to actually go and do something worthwhile with my life rather than fighting over article nonsense all the time. It just wasn't worth it. Silver  seren C 07:28, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 03:16, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable entrepreneur, wouldn't mind a merge or mention in one of the companies he worked for if they were notable. SportingFlyer  talk  03:54, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak delete The subject is a remarkable entrepreneur but has not (yet?) received the wide notice in sources required by Wikipedia. Most of the sources are industry-esoteric; the one in GQ is insignificant while Harvard's publications present an alumnus. The text is well put together and the presentation robust; moving this to drafts would be recommended, since the future might improve its standing. -The Gnome (talk) 08:02, 5 May 2018 (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.