- 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 Delete. MBisanz talk 02:59, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- People Design (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
My reason for nominating this for deletion is, no matter how notable the subject is, there is a COI issue with this article as it was created by a user who is called Budelmann (obvious COI issue) and shouldn't user with COI issues not be allowed to create articles that is related with themselves Moosato Cowabata (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Also not to mention non-notable company, which I forgot to mention as that article had been previouslytagged with a {{notability}} tag, which had been subsequently removed, which is another reason why it has now been nominated for AfD, also not enough ghits to justify notability. Moosato Cowabata (talk) 14:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I'm always a bit nervous when the identity of the person who created/edited an article is cited as justification for deletion. Ok, maybe that person made the article POV or created something not notable; but in that case the reason for deletion is POV or notability, not the eds id. I'm particularly worried by noms comment "no matter how notable the subject is...". Let's judge articles for what they are - not on the basis of who created or edited them. Annamonckton (talk) 18:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: nominator asserts reason for keeping not reason for deleting, so it hasn't effectively been nominated for deletion COI is not a reason for deletion--read the page. Someone please just close this AfD until it's nominated for deletion. As there is no assertion it should be deleted, there's nothing to discuss here. --69.225.10.208 (talk) 06:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, Personally, I don't see what is notable about this company, well, there is 1,300 ghits for the "BBK Design", plus the majority of these ghits under "People Design" are not related to the company, so personally another non-notable company. IMO, people with COI issues should not be allowed to create articles about themselves or their own organisations. Moosato Cowabata (talk) 14:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- This isn't "in your opinion," this is Wikipedia. Wikipedia has guidelines about COIs. Please read and follow them rather than you opinion, as they specifically address attempts, like yours here, to delete articles about notable subjects simply because there is a COI. The guideline is: "don't." There also is a board to deal with concerns about COIs. Go there if you're concerned. But, personally? Doesn't matter. --69.225.10.208 (talk) 22:59, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I just generally don't see what notable about this company is, well there is 1,300 ghits for BBK Studio and most of these ghits on "People Design" do not relate to the company itself, so that is my reason like what the nominator said. Christiantroy (talk) 01:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I don't see what is notable about this company anyway and what about this Hermann Miller person, all that is is a disambiguation page, does not tell what he is and what he does. Anton Ego (talk) 03:19, 18 February 2008 (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.