Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Lee

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Lee

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

Just another person. Search on Google web, scholar, books, and news does not locate anything significant about him other than an adequate proof that he exists, but does not appear to have anything in the way of establishing his general notability Cantaloupe2 (talk) 19:34, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:52, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete clearly a promo piece. Created as first edit by single-purpose account of Special:Contributions/Ogbryan. Another example of why the policy of allowing accounts to create articles on their first edit needs to change. W Nowicki (talk) 18:24, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Subject easily meets the "Significant coverage" mandate according the "Notability" statues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ogbryan (talk • contribs) 06:19, 3 October 2011 (UTC) — Ogbryan (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

argument you say that, but you didn't provide rationale. I gave mine. There is very little to be found on this person and I could not locate reliable materials (covered in WP:RS )) with adequate coverage about him to provide the information written about him without the need for original research. Bibliographies are not specific enough to allow those sources to be identified or verified. Excessive parts of article lacks inline citation. quotation of subject himself from an interview does not establish notability. Since anyone can make blogs, coverage in personal blog does not count as reliable source coverage. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 18:03, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete needs references to establish notability. --Kvng (talk) 04:28, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article claims that he is a "widely acknowledged" expert on search engine technology, but that "wide acknowledgement" is not evident in a search of Google News. He is occasionally quoted in stories about search engines, but nobody ever seems to have written anything ABOUT him, as is required for Wikipedia notability. --MelanieN (talk) 02:26, 6 October 2011 (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.