Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Hockey

Add links
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 no consensus. Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

William Hockey

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

William Hockey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

His company is notable, but he does not inherit that notability. Fails GNG MistyGraceWhite (talk) 15:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 16:19, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I appreciate you reviewing it! Thank you. Is there more content or substance I can add to change your thoughts on it? Plaid is an extremely critical company in the ecosystem, and having more transparency on the company and founders is really important. I think it would be very useful for the broader financial services community to know more about them and the companies background, given they are extremely private, quiet, and have stayed mostly out of the media. There are similar scaled founders like Patrick or John Collison who seem to have fairly thorough pages. Fintechmafia (talk) 16:45, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment no doubt that plaid is an important actor, but if you compare the his article with the collison's brothers one, it seems to me the two brothers have done notable work outside of the company they founded, while hockey is only notable for plaid. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 11:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Clear lack of
    WP:BIO. Some articles that show incredible depth include this CNBC article that goes into great detail about his life's work leading up to plaid, and this Forbes article discussing his work before the company. And this this Forbes India article which also shows great depth. Sulfurboy (talk) 15:13, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
@User:Sulfurboy if you read the sources, you will find that other than plaid, the so called their work before the company is actually nothing and is given 4-5 lines at most. All articles are about plaid, how it was created and how it works. It is common for these articles to give 4-5 lines to the founder/CEO, but nothing in depth. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 15:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
is it also common for the articles to focus on the founders more than the company itself ? the websites, prominent in business circles, have given Hockey a lot more attention than they need to.Grmike (talk) 06:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)grmike[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You should really read through the notability guidelines for these things and learn them before voting. Instead of just voting keep on almost everything, based on personal opinions like your doing. It really isn't fair to or good for the AfD process. Let alone users who put their time into this. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
you mean like drive-by nominating like you did with dentsply sirona ? if this isn't good enough for you then you are not looking hard enough.Grmike (talk) 06:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)grmikeGrmike (talk) 06:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)grmike[reply]
comment according to Bloomberg William Hockey is now a billionaire. Just in time to show up on next year's The World's Billionaires list, likely as the youngest new addition.Grmike (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)grmike[reply]
While not speaking to that particular source, people find different sources when doing a BEFORE sometimes. That's just life and how Google Search works. In no way does it equate to something being a drivr by AfD when it happens either. Nice deflection though. You sure told me. It sounds to me from your answer that your arbitrarly voting keep in AfDs I'm involved in as personal targeting for me doing an AfD that you disagreed with. Otherwise, I'm not sure how an AfD from a month ago is relevant. Or maybe it was just an extremely weak whataboutism that I'm reading to much into. I rather go with personal targeting, but which do you prefer? Are you targeting me or was it just an extremely weak response? --Adamant1 (talk) 06:38, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
no I am not after you, maybe you are being
paranoid. Your nomination of Dentsply Sirona is the reason I started paying more attention to this section of Wikipedia. I did work on that article and know that it is definitely something worthy of its own article. For much of the last ten years it was part of the nasdaq100 composite index (100 largest non financial companies). That is the AfD that brought my attention to this part of Wikipedia and since then I have been nominating (and learning) at the same time. I'm still learning so bear with me. I apologize if I said anything wrong.Grmike (talk) 06:45, 1 May 2020 (UTC)grmike[reply
]
also want to say that if I nominate keep on article that should go an administrator will likely ignore my comment since they review the comment for merit before tallying the final result.Grmike (talk) 06:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)grmike[reply]
That makes sense. Most of us, including me, are still learning. So no worries. There's a lot to learn. I appreciate the apology though. Civility like that is a rare thing around here. I'm not paranoid. I was just asking. I have a few people that follow me around and do crap because of past issues I've had with them. That's just the reality of Wikipedia unfortunately. At least the article about the dentist wasn't deleted. AfDs aren't suppose to be cleanup, but I still semi-consider them a success if it leads to the article being improved. I'm not much permanent badly sourced stubs. On the voting, I think it really depends on the admin. They don't think they are obligated to do a good review of everyones reasoning and sometimes they don't. So its important to put thought into your vote before making it. Maybe it balances out though. Who knows, but I have seen some AfDs go ways IMO that they shouldn't have based on the votes and peoples reasons for giving them. A lot of people have agendas to. Especially with certain article categories. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Merge doesn't have any notability outside of the one company may be
    WP:Toosoon, also worth noting that original creator has a conflict of interests as he disclosed when creating it. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 11:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply
    ]
comment - q: is bilionaire status enough to get someone their own page ? ie Jason Chang Grmike (talk) 14:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)grmike[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:11, 9 May 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/William_Hockey&oldid=957091200"