Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winslow Sargeant


 * 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   Deleted - CSD G5: Creation by a banned user in violation of ban. Codf1977 (talk) 19:16, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Winslow Sargeant

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Seems to have been created purely because this was one of 4 recess appointments. I see no previous entries for people holding the position of "chief counsel of advocacy for the Small Business Administration", and don't think he meets WP:N for anything else. So creating an entry purely because he's mentioned in the news as 1 of 4 recess appointments would fall foul of WP:BLP1E. Rd232 talk 08:04, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per nom.--Epeefleche (talk) 09:01, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The Wisconsin Technology Network does not notability make. Beyond that, the other two sparse refs are insufficient to reflect the broad coverage required to evidence notability, nor is the title "chief counsel of advocacy for the Small Business Administration" one that is automatically viewed as notable.--Epeefleche (talk) 13:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Keep Obviously. Nom failed to follow wp:before. The nom also looks like antagonistic retaliation for reverting his POV pushing in other articles. Freakshownerd (talk) 12:39, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I reject that on all counts (I did a BEFORE check). With the expansion, this looks more notable, though I'll leave others to judge. Rd232 talk 13:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Seems to be a distinguished engineer. For example, Bloomberg says "He has been named a Kauffman Fellow – Class 11 and has received the inaugural 2002 Wisconsin Distinguished Young Alumni Award and was the 2003 Outstanding Engineering Alumni Awardee from Northeastern University.". Colonel Warden (talk) 17:08, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Awards appear to be trivial, not nearly enough to establish notability. Same for the SBA position.  A bit of a pointy article creation simply because it was an Obama recess appointment, so all we're left with is WP:BLP1E. Tarc (talk) 22:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Tarc has been stalking and harassing me and accusing me of being a sockpuppet. I created several articles on Obama's recess appointments. And this one, like the others, is about a notable figure in government and with substantial private sector accomplishments as well, as the reliable independent sources demonstrate. Several of the cited articles are about him in their entirety and the content on this subject could be expanded substantially. Freakshownerd (talk) 02:14, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Both Tarc and Rd232 are hounding you? I couldn't say.  But on a substantive basis, Tarc makes good points here.  And only you, not he, is pointing to alleged misbehavior by you elsewhere.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:29, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * What misbehavior is that exactly? Rd232 informed another editor on his talkpage that he was in fact mistaken and confused earlier today when he was edit warring against consensus, hounding me, and blocking over a content dispute in which he was deeply involved. Tarc's trolling is also well documented. Other than Tarc's assertion of bad faith, which is against policy, what point exactly do you think he made well? The subject is covered very substantially in numerous reliable independent sources for his work as a venture capitalist and with the SBA including as a recently appointed official in charge of helping direct funding assistance programs that aid economic development and company expansions as reported on in numerous business periodicals. Freakshownerd (talk) 02:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you misunderstand. What alleged misbehavior on your part did you point to elsewhere?  You commented in this string re the accusation of your alleged socking (elsewhere).  Nobody else has brought that up here.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we could stop multiplying this particular drama across even more pages, particularly since F seems unable to do so in a way that is either polite or entirely accurate. Rd232 talk 02:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken once again Epeefleche. If you read his comment you will see that he did indeed accuse me of a misdeed in creating this article. This is one of many false, abusive and harassing accusations he has made against me. Again, I created several articles on people that were recess appointments and have created several articles on other notable administration officials. It might be better for you not to join in with the shit slinging and to stick to discussion of the notability guidelines as they apply to subjects covered very substantially in numerous reliable independent sources. Is there an indication that the sources aren't reliable? Is the coverage in articles, some of them more than one page long, about this subject inadequate? Is there some other objection? Or did you just want to attack someone who has been outspoken against your BLP violations abuse of editing priveledges elsewhere? I wonder. Freakshownerd (talk) 02:48, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, if you read my nomination carefully, I did not accuse of you bad faith or anything. I also acknowledged subsequently that there was more to the subject than I realised, after you expanded the article showing him as founder of a sizable tech company. Let the AFD play out - focus on content. Rd232 talk 08:06, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * OK. Let's focus on the substance of this AfD.  Now Freak is attacking all three !voters against the article.  Just a suggestion.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:51, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * At least three of the commenters here are stalking my contributions and causing disruption elsewhere. But by all means let's discuss the article subject's notability. There are numerous cites to substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. So what is the problem exactly you're having? Freakshownerd (talk) 02:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Having posted on your talk page before, it is automatically watchlisted. Today, I noticed a post from someone about you creating articles on 4 Obama recess appointees, so I followed the link here (haven't gotten around to looking for the others yet).  No one is "stalking you".  I hope the sock investigations start soon, cause this is so ChildofMidnight-ish here, it's surreal. Tarc (talk) 03:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Interesting. I was all set to go Delete on this as BLP1E until I saw this. That looks like not-trivial reliable coverage from well before the one event he's best known for. CW's source is also good, being balanced between historical and recent coverage. Overall, maybe just enough. Alzarian16 (talk) 10:56, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If the tech stuff could just be documented in a more mainstream media source [I'm excluding the Bloomberg listing, it's not news], I'd lean to keep. But GNews has nothing that doesn't relate primarily to his SBA appointment. Still, it's well-documented enough to make me neutral now. Rd232 talk 09:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per WP:BLP1E no indication of lasting significance. Codf1977 (talk) 14:17, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Seems that thuis is not that notavble an appointment..Slatersteven (talk) 15:10, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The nominator indicated above that he is now neutral on the need for deletion. Colonel Warden (talk) 17:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The nominator has not withdrawn his nomination.  Snotty Wong   confer 18:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It is far too late in the game anyways for that, as there have been several delete opinions by others now. Tarc (talk) 19:22, 24 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for rescue by the Article Rescue Squadron, with no explanation as to why this article should be rescued and how that could happen (per ARS instructions).    Snotty Wong   confer 18:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Close call, but the individual is clearly not notable per WP:N. The whole recess appointment thing is WP:BLP1E.  It's very unlikely that we could actually fill an article with notable information about this person.  This would be a permastub article that would only serve as a glorified resume.    Snotty Wong   confer 18:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete G5 - Banned user. Codf1977 (talk) 17:58, 27 August 2010 (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.