Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quinley, Kevin M.
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 of the nomination was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 11:30, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Quinley, Kevin M.
My initial reaction was that this qualified for Speedy as a vanity page per A7. I note that the creator of the article is User:Kquinley, whose only contribution is this article. However, on re-reading the article, there may be some argument that this person satisfies WP:BIO. There may be sufficient ghits for this person as well (assuming it's the same person). Out of an abundance of caution, I think it's best to put this one forward for consideration by all. Agent 86 19:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral. Notable in the world of accountancy, perhaps, but outside it? Is WP:PROF an appropriate criterion to use? If so, more references to his published work will be needed. Tevildo 20:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment' If he meets WP:PROF as an accountant, then he ought to be deemed notable. While most respected accountancy journals have online versions, they are also fee for access so far as I know. (I'm in Finance currently, but not a CPA.) We might need a CPA to test the claims unless the article grows references. WP:BIO would also be a legitimate test. GRBerry 01:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 00:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, although not the most notable, the ghits seem to assert some degree of notability. We can't just delete it because it isn't Wikified. --Alphachimp talk 07:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Using ProQuest, I find several articles written by him in Business Insurance and some in Safety Management and Veterinary Economics, not much. Afd maybe should be relisted again. —Centrx→talk • 21:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. It should of course be renamed to "Kevin M. Quinley". —Centrx→talk • 18:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Ian Manka Talk to me! 18:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Somewhat distinguished career, but don't see anything encyclopedically notable. "500 papers" claim unsourced, if those are peer-reviewed, I might reconsider. ~ trialsanderrors 19:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep and speedy rename to put the last name last, needs sources Crazynas t 20:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unless the 500 papers referenced JPotter 22:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Jason Potter, note that merely writing stuff will not make you notable, but if the books have ISBNs and are properly sourced, maybe keep. SM247My Talk 22:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep references can be fixed per {{sofixit}} and {{solookitup}}. --DavidHOzAu 04:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - My initial was delete. The subject matter is dry, but would be to anyone outside the industry. An author of 10 books (confirmed on [Amazon (link might not work, I think they use a token in the URL). I might even work with the guy to clean it up - kind of bored right now. --Geneb1955Talk/CVU 08:35, 6 July 2006 (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.