Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenton L. Saunders
- 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. Star Mississippi 02:48, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Brenton L. Saunders (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:RESUME, nothing else of note. Thirty4 (talk) 01:20, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Just a resume. Insufficient notability. Doctormatt (talk) 07:09, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Thirty4 (talk) 01:20, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Thirty4 (talk) 01:20, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:32, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Delete a non-notable person in the health industry.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. While the article sucks, that's not a reason to delete it. Please read WP:BEFORE. If you look for sources, there are literally tens of thousands of results, a myriad of sources covering this guy, who has been CEO of some incredibly huge corporations, including Allergan, which was sold in 2016 for 40 billion dollars. There is absolutely no way that the nominator nor those who voted to delete (yes, I realize one of them is a long-term abuser of AfD who is regularly discussed at ANI), no way that BEFORE was performed.Jacona (talk) 01:20, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Jacona! I found many web articles mentioning this person, but I did not find much that is not promotional in some way. WP:BUSINESSPERSONOUTCOME makes the claim that "Corporate presidents, chief executive officers and chairpersons of the boards of directors of companies listed in the Fortune 500 (US) or the FTSE 100 Index (UK) are generally kept as notable." This not a policy, though, and the "generally" makes me wonder if this article's subject could be one who is not included. Also, Allergan is not on the current Fortune 500, as far as I can tell (the Fortune website is not very friendly...). So I'm wondering: is there anything notable about this person besides their CEO-ness? Doctormatt (talk) 06:13, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- as I said above, Allergan was sold in 2016 and is part of AbbVie, no longer an independent company, so no, you won't find it on a current listing of the Fortune 500. When considering the notability of a person, or a company, we care about history, a current list is fine of course, but we care about the entire history, not just today. At the time this was nominated for deletion, there were 17 references in the article. There are so many available sources in major publications including [1], [2], [3], just to cover three of the top general business mags, all of which are widely different, all of which include his name in the title, not just some obscure mention. Seriously, competency is required. To participate in AfD, one should read Wikipedia:Deletion policy, and should follow WP:BEFORE. Nominations like this one are disruptive. Jacona (talk) 10:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jacona. It is true that I have not often involved myself in articles related to the business world; I am trying to become more competent and help with AfDs. I have read WP:BEFORE, etc.; feel free to not mention them again. From those links you shared, I still cannot tell what makes this person notable; my understanding has been that having press coverage does not automatically imply notability. If you were to claim sufficient notability for anyone who was CEO of a company above a certain size (or that appeared on some list like the Fortune 500), I could understand that as a nice, fairly clear definition of notability that you are using for some business people. Should I take that as sufficient evidence of notability here? Is that the general consensus at WP? Thanks! Doctormatt (talk) 19:14, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- Before participating at AfD, you can and should review the relevant guidelines, especially when there is an "OUTCOMES" section, and observe the process for a while. While there are no rules that state as such, you can be sure that people in certain jobs are going to be notable, without looking for sources, because you know there will be sources. I personally wouldn't waste my time considering whether the president of a company that sold well-known products, was publicly held, and is widely associated with the word billions was notable, I'd assume they most likely were. In this particular case, since the nominator brought it here, I did waste my time, and with the barest of efforts on my part, uncovered a myriad of significant coverage of the man. It's not about what is in the article, it's about whether the information for the article exists. And (since I've seen several recent nominations have ignored these), it's not whether the person is currently in the position, it's not whether the sources are online, it's not whether the sources are behind paywalls, it's not whether the sources are in English... The correct question is "do the sources exist?"Jacona (talk) 13:26, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Jacona! Thanks for continuing to talk to me. I agree there are many sources of certain kinds of information related to this person. I am trying to figure out what information in those sources show that the person is notable; it has been my understanding that mere "coverage" of a person does not automatically makes that person notable. Is being CEO of a large company enough for notability (assuming good sources), or is the standard that the person has to have done something (invented something, improved some manufacturing process, etc.) notable? Is the mere holding of high-paid positions sufficient to make a person notable (again, assuming good sources exist)? Thanks! Doctormatt (talk) 19:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Before participating at AfD, you can and should review the relevant guidelines, especially when there is an "OUTCOMES" section, and observe the process for a while. While there are no rules that state as such, you can be sure that people in certain jobs are going to be notable, without looking for sources, because you know there will be sources. I personally wouldn't waste my time considering whether the president of a company that sold well-known products, was publicly held, and is widely associated with the word billions was notable, I'd assume they most likely were. In this particular case, since the nominator brought it here, I did waste my time, and with the barest of efforts on my part, uncovered a myriad of significant coverage of the man. It's not about what is in the article, it's about whether the information for the article exists. And (since I've seen several recent nominations have ignored these), it's not whether the person is currently in the position, it's not whether the sources are online, it's not whether the sources are behind paywalls, it's not whether the sources are in English... The correct question is "do the sources exist?"Jacona (talk) 13:26, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jacona. It is true that I have not often involved myself in articles related to the business world; I am trying to become more competent and help with AfDs. I have read WP:BEFORE, etc.; feel free to not mention them again. From those links you shared, I still cannot tell what makes this person notable; my understanding has been that having press coverage does not automatically imply notability. If you were to claim sufficient notability for anyone who was CEO of a company above a certain size (or that appeared on some list like the Fortune 500), I could understand that as a nice, fairly clear definition of notability that you are using for some business people. Should I take that as sufficient evidence of notability here? Is that the general consensus at WP? Thanks! Doctormatt (talk) 19:14, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- as I said above, Allergan was sold in 2016 and is part of AbbVie, no longer an independent company, so no, you won't find it on a current listing of the Fortune 500. When considering the notability of a person, or a company, we care about history, a current list is fine of course, but we care about the entire history, not just today. At the time this was nominated for deletion, there were 17 references in the article. There are so many available sources in major publications including [1], [2], [3], just to cover three of the top general business mags, all of which are widely different, all of which include his name in the title, not just some obscure mention. Seriously, competency is required. To participate in AfD, one should read Wikipedia:Deletion policy, and should follow WP:BEFORE. Nominations like this one are disruptive. Jacona (talk) 10:06, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - not notable Puglia1999 (talk) 23:50, 25 March 2022 (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.