Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen A. Parke: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 11:33, 13 February 2022

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. Randykitty (talk) 14:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen A. Parke

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears non-notable; Sources don't appear to be on the subject in detail, and are general. Subject has also requested deletion on WP:BLPN --Mdann52talk to me! 06:49, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Regardless of whether the person requesting the deletion is really the BLP's subject, I agree with Mdann52 that the subject does not seem to pass WP:BIO.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 16:03, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:31, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. - Cwobeel (talk) 21:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nominator. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I would not !vote delete on this if not for the request, given that he seems to have made major contributions to his field, and the field (semiconductors) is hardly insignificant. Can we direct the user to WP:OTRS to confirm they are the article subject? Ivanvector (talk) 21:55, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To be more specific, he passes WP:NACADEMIC #1, #3 (which specifically mentions the IEEE), and #7. Better sourcing is required, however. Therefore I !vote keep, but please consider my argument null if the requester does confirm his ID. Ivanvector (talk) 22:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have to disagree, as far as WP:NACADEMIC #1 and #7 I would agree if there were additional sources that showed a significant impact, adoption or use of the published/patented technologies. I don´t think #3 applies as he is not an IEEE Fellow. I myself have two patents on systems and methods related to semiconductor technology that were used by my employer in a successful commercial product. Thousands of other engineers do as well. Personally I am proud of my work, and to have contributed to the development of the state of the art in technology at the time. But in my personal view, I don't think we should be in an encyclopedia for it.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 09:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. per nominator. Request was made to me when I undid a page blanking. I think that the subject of the article could be considered a relatively unknown, non-public figure. Moreover, he is probably not notable per the analysis by Crystallizedcarbon. Although I think this is enough to support the deletion, the request makes the result definite for me. I also would prefer that the person making the request confirm his identity but I do not think that is a prerequisite in this case. (One could wonder why the article has been up for four years but perhaps Mr. Parke did not know about it or whether he could do anything about it.) If the person who is the real subject of the article is not the person who made the request, Mr. Parke could request the article be undeleted if he shows up later and proves his identity. I doubt that will happen because the rationale seems plausible. Donner60 (talk) 18:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this page.''
+<!--Template:Afd top
+Note:  If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]].  When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
+The result was '''Delete'''.  [[User:Randykitty|Randykitty]] ([[User talk:Randykitty|talk]]) 14:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 ===[[Stephen A. Parke]]===
-{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|?}}
 :{{la|Stephen A. Parke}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen A. Parke|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 October 31#{{anchorencode:Stephen A. Parke}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stephen_A._Parke Stats]</span>)
 :({{Find sources AFD|Stephen A. Parke}})
 Appears non-notable; Sources don't appear to be on the subject in detail, and are general. Subject has also requested deletion on [[WP:BLPN]] --[[User:Mdann52|<span style="color:Green">'''Mdann'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Mdann52|<span style="color:Red">'''52'''</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Mdann52|<span style="color:Maroon">''talk to me!''</span>]]</small> 06:49, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''': Regardless of whether the person requesting the deletion is really the BLP's subject, I agree with [[User:Mdann52|<span style="color:Green">'''Mdann'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Mdann52|<span style="color:Red">'''52'''</span>]] that the subject does not seem to pass [[WP:BIO]].--[[User:Crystallizedcarbon|Crystallizedcarbon]] ([[User talk:Crystallizedcarbon|talk]]) 16:03, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
+:<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America|list of United States of America-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 14:31, 31 October 2014 (UTC)</small>
+:<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Technology|list of Technology-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 14:32, 31 October 2014 (UTC)</small>
+:<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Academics and educators|list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 14:32, 31 October 2014 (UTC)</small>
+*'''Delete''' per nom. -  [[User:Cwobeel|<span style="color:#339966">Cwobeel</span>]] [[User_talk:Cwobeel|<span style="font-size:80%">(talk)</span>]] 21:23, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' - per nominator. [[User:NorthBySouthBaranof|NorthBySouthBaranof]] ([[User talk:NorthBySouthBaranof|talk]]) 21:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
+*'''Comment''' - I would not !vote delete on this if not for the request, given that he seems to have made major contributions to his field, and the field (semiconductors) is hardly insignificant. Can we direct the user to [[WP:OTRS]] to confirm they are the article subject? [[User:Ivanvector|Ivanvector]] ([[User talk:Ivanvector|talk]]) 21:55, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
+::To be more specific, he passes [[WP:NACADEMIC]] #1, #3 (which specifically mentions the IEEE), and #7. Better sourcing is required, however. Therefore I !vote '''keep''', but please consider my argument null if the requester does confirm his ID. [[User:Ivanvector|Ivanvector]] ([[User talk:Ivanvector|talk]]) 22:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
+:::I have to disagree, as far as [[WP:NACADEMIC]] #1 and #7 I would agree if there were additional sources that showed a significant impact, adoption or use of the published/patented technologies. I don´t think #3 applies as he is not an IEEE Fellow. I myself have two patents on systems and methods related to semiconductor technology that were used by my employer in a successful commercial product. Thousands of other engineers do as well. Personally I am proud of my work, and to have contributed to the development of the state of the art in technology at the time. But in my personal view, I don't think we should be in an encyclopedia for it.--[[User:Crystallizedcarbon|Crystallizedcarbon]] ([[User talk:Crystallizedcarbon|talk]]) 09:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
+*'''Delete'''. per nominator. Request was made to me when I undid a page blanking. I think that the subject of the article could be considered a relatively unknown, non-public figure. Moreover, he is probably not notable per the analysis by [[User:Crystallizedcarbon|Crystallizedcarbon]]. Although I think this is enough to support the deletion, the request makes the result definite for me. I also would prefer that the person making the request confirm his identity but I do not think that is a prerequisite in this case. (One could wonder why the article has been up for four years but perhaps Mr. Parke did not know about it or whether he could do anything about it.) If the person who is the real subject of the article is not the person who made the request, Mr. Parke could request the article be undeleted if he shows up later and proves his identity. I doubt that will happen because the rationale seems plausible. [[User:Donner60|Donner60]] ([[User talk:Donner60|talk]]) 18:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>