Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vince Stanzione

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. Sandstein 13:14, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vince Stanzione

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

Despite the WP:LOTSOFSOURCES, this is the subject of mostly passing mention in unrelated third party publications. Note that several apparent news stories were repeatedly reprinted from a press release network and are essentially self-promotion. The way this coverage is currently presented is rather disingenuous; being repeatedly quoted about the European economy isn't exactly notability for the speaker, even if it's repeated over and over thanks to it being free press. Except for this gem, in-depth coverage of this person appears to exist only in publications by associated groups. Generally, where this subject does appear in coverage by unrelated parties, it's either insubstantial or it's because the subject is talking about another matter entirely, which may or may not be notable (e.g., the economy). This subject's accomplishments, while admirable, fall short of WP:ANYBIO. In any event, reliable sources don't contain much information that could support encyclopedic biographical content, apart from WP:RESUME. Finally, the WP:COI-factor seems to beg a re-write from scratch, if anything other than a résumé could be made from it. JFHJr (㊟) 22:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Better Sources available but are dated. I agreed tat some of the sources are not relevant and I see these are now being removed. I do think the entry should stay at it does have some value. I did find some published bio but it goes back to 1997 see: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4890504.html

Also the prospectus of his company floatation

http://www.investegate.co.uk/article.aspx?id=200502210700148112I

I did also find mentioned of him in the Times however this is behind a paywall

Hope this helps — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.30.57.107 (talk) 09:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment — Note the "prospectus" above is simply a press release. I'm not able to access the document at highbeam; whether it is actually substantially about the subject (as opposed to his business) is unclear. JFHJr (㊟) 22:44, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep and semi-protect : I, and a few others, cleaned this article up a while back, removing all the stuff cited to self-published sources - see this version - but it seems Pugdemskuf (talk · contribs) and some IPs (and my knowledge of WP:DUCKs suggest that would be either Stanzione or somebody associated with him) has put it all back again. Believe me, if I could have sent this to AfD when I cleaned it up, I would have, and I would have loved to put some stuff in about his TV business crashing and burning, but there was enough stuff in reliable sources to make him borderline notable, and I couldn't cite the failure of the Advert Channel to anything but unreliable sources. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CharlieEchoTango (contact) 09:14, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More sources: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4890504.html the full article can now be read here and clearly gives information that can be used from an independent source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/36617064/Vince-Stanzione-Press-Cuttings

A prospectus is a document when a company goes public it is not a press release as someone has stated. I have found the original document here: http://www.thefinancialtrader.net/members/tvcfinal.pdf

Keep and semi-protect I believe that enough time has been spent on Vince Stanzione and the outcome should be to keep the article but some of the references should be amended. the COI issue is a non event, I do not think it is Vince Stanzione parties related editing it however it is clear there is an undertone of negative basis to him and before anyone says I have a COI I bought a course from him and am happy with the what I have learnt but I have no interests in editing Wikipedia pages. As previous editors has stated this page does have some value and should remain in Wiki however any commercial/sales pitch references should be deleted.Please maintain a neutral, unbiased point of view regardless what you think user:Ritchie333 and you have been heavy on the delete button in the past. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.33.248.37 (talk) 18:50, 15 September 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Note: — 83.33.248.37 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Do you have any diffs to back your claim up I have been "heavy on the delete", given I've !voted "keep" above? Anyway, I don't know Stanzione from a hole in the ground, I just think that's not much that can be written about him from reliable sources, but there's just enough to sustain an article. --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:15, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 05:49, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think this matter is settled and the Afd should now be removed. The outcome: the page should remain, some of the duplicate references should be removed, any commercial reference or advertising material should not be allowed to be added. Overall the entry in the current format is clean and well referenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.37.243.206 (talk) 14:21, 22 September 2012 (UTC) — 83.37.243.206 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

If the matter was settled, the AfD wouldn't have been relisted twice. At the moment, the only person who !voted is me, and if that carries (and tbh, it won't, it's more likely to go to "no consensus"), you won't be able to edit the article anymore as an IP. Is that something you really want? --Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:58, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - He's been in the news since at least Mirror September 18, 2003. Also see [1][2][3]. There's other source material. Meets WP:GNG. The article has some problems and attracts some problems., but some clean up would move things forward. No need to delete. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 03:12, 30 September 2012 (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.