- 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, no consensus to delete. NawlinWiki 05:19, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Norman Adsetts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Nominated for speedy deletion under criteria A7 for not asserting notability. The article does assert notability so it is not a speedy candidate. It is also referenced. However the notability may not satisfy guidelines. No vote from me. Sam Blacketer 10:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Non-notable bio. Keb25 11:24, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per not satisfying guidelines. WP:NN. --Evb-wiki 13:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep He's been appointed to the National Council for the Arts Council of Englandhere, a rather important department. Also, he's got the title "Sir", which means he's knighted. If he's knighted, he's notable. If anything, it ought to be rewrited.--Alasdair 13:59, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm afraid the second part of your argument, has, in fact, been roundly rejected by the Wikipedia community. It does seem like this guy is probably notable, but the article as-is doesn't prove that. < eleland // talkedits > 16:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, the title of Sir does not indicate royalty these days in the UK. People are knighted if they have made significant contributions to British society. (e.g. Geoff Hurst and Alex Ferguson are knighted due to their contributions to English football, but they have nothing to do with royalty) In fact, it's like a national honor these days. People called Sir or Dame have received the national award DBE and KBE for their achievements and what not, which are higher than OBE and MBE. Now, the title of "Lord" may be what you are referring to.--Alasdair 03:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm afraid the second part of your argument, has, in fact, been roundly rejected by the Wikipedia community. It does seem like this guy is probably notable, but the article as-is doesn't prove that. < eleland // talkedits > 16:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep He's notable for building a small local family firm (Adsetts Ice Cream) up into a multi-million global business SIP in about 20 years; he gets appointed to these committees because of his achievements, not because of his ancestors. It's ridiculous that this keeps being challenged (mainly because the guidelines for notable business leaders are not very clear). By all means rewrite the article. -- roundhouse0 16:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete: I'm not convinced of notability. CRGreathouse (t | c) 16:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete as there is no attribution of notability to credible, independent sources, and there are few results on Google News Archive. It appears he is possibly notable, but a sourced article may not be possible. --Dhartung | Talk 18:35, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep as executive of a major firm. Since he's notable, the article can be improved.DGG (talk) 05:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I'm sure many editors share my prejudice - my gut reaction is to think "fatcat". However, I think this is systemic bias: he's on a lot of major national committees: Arts Council, deputy chairman of Universiade, chairman of the regional council of the CBI, among the UK "elite 300" invited to the Lord Mayor of London's 1999 Millennium party, and so on. Gordonofcartoon 13:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - there are plenty of sources, e.g. Who's Who, the national press. SIG plc is easily sourced, e.g. "In 2007, SIG reported half-yearly sales of over £1 billion, and was the highest earning and most profitable company in the Sheffield City Region". Sheffield Star Sept 2007 I'm not sure that fat-cats are necessarily to be excluded from Wikipedia. What is wrong with this as a source? What is disputed? SIG is notable - yes. Adsetts was its managing director and is its life president - yes. The company grew enormously (to a PLC) under his guidance - yes. The business guidelines really need to be rewritten if there is any problem with Adsetts. He is on a par with Sheffield's great steel barons of the 1800s (Mark Firth etc.). Carminis 12:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - of course it asserts notability. Querulous and US-centric nomination - David Gerard 17:56, 26 September 2007 (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.