Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Laurie

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 08:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Laurie

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

Delete. Nothing to indicate notability beyond being a businessman/surveyor and supporter of the arts through board/trustee membership. Refs include unreliable sources (Wikipedia and Who's Who), as well as a link to the corporate website of an organization that simply has his name listed as a trustee. Article lacks significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Cindamuse (talk) 11:49, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 15:23, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Having an OBE I think would makes the article pass WP:BIO. Head of one of the local Quango's, which may be soon be getting the bullet soon, doesn't. But I think worth keeping for the OBE. scope_creep (talk) 00:25, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I haven't yet looked into any other reasons for notability, but would point out that an OBE is a pretty minor honour, held by tens of thousands of people, so is not sufficient in itself to grant notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. That is the point of these gongs, is to make people notable. I suspect their would be less than 10k of them in the UK as a whole, and that is fairly rare. scope_creep (talk) 00:18, 15 November 2010 (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) 00:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Appears to have some notability. PicodeGato (talk) 01:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Can you be a bit more specific? This is not a voting forum, but rather a discussion. Thanks, Cindamuse (talk) 10:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 01:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Though OBE is not by itself notable, and surveyor who manages to get one will clearly be at the top of his profession. DGG ( talk ) 05:58, 5 December 2010 (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.