Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Schutzler
Appearance
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Acather96 (talk) 06:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Michael Schutzler (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Cleaned up but not sure if subject fits notability criteria. Seems the only possible claim is being CEO of Livemocha, but does that entitle the subject to a separate article? Also, unsure of reliablity of sources. LordVetinari (talk) 03:04, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:17, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep As well as being CEO of Livemocha, he is the former CEO of Classmates.com, and a former senior executive of RealNetworks and Monster.com. He's been interviewed by reliable sources on business and technology issues many times. His variety and depth of business experience make him notable. Cullen328 (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I think Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#No inherited notability answers that. I also question whether the subject is sufficiently notable to warrant a separate article. If a person is not notable outside the scope of an organisation, should they have an article outside the scope of that organisation? LordVetinari (talk) 02:52, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep- I've ref'd some of this, although the CEOsherpa main page may not be independent, and someone else should remove citation tags after reviewing as I'm still new at this ;). Some details I've left commented out pending verification/further developments (e.g., full book citation). Are Amazon.com author bios WP:RS? Dru of Id (talk) 21:34, 2 April 2011 (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.