Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (4th nomination) - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

306:. The previous two AFDs were overwhelming keeps, and there's no indication that anything has changed to support a different result. The argument that the only available sources cover only what makes him notable, whether accurate or not, is particularly unconvincing to me. Knowledge (XXG) biographes are generally better when their contents are limited to material which reflects notability, rather than being bulked out with dating history, childhood incidents, and trivia. 377:, sources suggest notability, plus there may be other available sourcing, which I will dig into a bit later. I believe that his company won an industry award recently, which helps build up notability. If we assume that "Creative Professionals" include founders/designers of games companies, than this award would give him notability under point 3 of 285:
information beyond being a co-founder of Jagex and developer of RuneScape is mentioned in any reliable source. The fact that all but the barest of facts are sourced from non-independent sources is a clue to this. There is nothing here that is both worthy of reporting and not appropriate for the articles on the company or its products.
381:. The fact that there is no biographical information should not be a reason for deletion: Better to provide the reader with the information that exists in a stub, rather than have no information at all. Whilst I can see why this is on the borderline of "Keep" and "Delete" according to guidelines, I think that 385:
should be invoked here. The mission statement is to provide the end-user, the reader of Knowledge (XXG), with reliable sourced information on notable topics. It is entirely possible that following the industry award Jagex Ltd recieved, some may be interested in the founder of the firm. We should not
284:
Jagex and RuneScape are undoubtedly notable. However the founder and developer--despite wealth and appearing (with no significant information beyond the source of his wealth) in lists of wealthy people--is not. There is no significant coverage of him whatsoever--no significant biographical
386:
deny them the reliable sourced information currently available. I am by no means saying all the content of the article is perfect, but I believe it would be a net positive to the project goals to maintain and improve this article. --
253: 418:
Ah also, I found an additional source: The Daily Telegraph listed him and his brother as the 11th richest young entrepreneurs in the UK, this surely helps with notability concerns... (Added to the article too.)
190: 96: 91: 86: 81: 151: 461:. Notable, well sourced, and even well written enough to be a C-class article. There are also other reliable sources out there that haven't been added. Why was this nominated? -- 247: 324:"The argument that the only available sources cover only what makes him notable" is a (possibly deliberate) misrepresentation of the rationale. If I thought there was 184: 76: 354: 440:. Plenty of interviews and the like to establish notability, which is clear from the current consensus. While the page not having citations is an issue, 328:
that made him notable, I would not have raised the AfD. The reliable independent coverage is of his wealth, noting its source—not inherently notable.
404:
I have now expanded the article to mention the industry award won by his firm, and cleaned it up a little with an additional citebook. --
17: 334: 291: 268: 124: 119: 470: 453: 428: 413: 395: 366: 340: 315: 311: 297: 235: 128: 59: 205: 111: 172: 485: 36: 449: 229: 307: 484:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
225: 35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
166: 441: 445: 275: 162: 378: 330: 287: 212: 261: 198: 241: 466: 362: 115: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
424: 409: 391: 382: 178: 55: 462: 358: 107: 65: 145: 420: 405: 387: 50: 478:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
141: 137: 133: 260: 197: 274: 211: 97:
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (5th nomination)
92:
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (4th nomination)
87:
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (3rd nomination)
82:
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (2nd nomination)
39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 488:). No further edits should be made to this page. 355:list of video game related deletion discussions 8: 442:poor quality is not grounds for deletion 353:: This debate has been included in the 74: 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 72: 77:Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower 24: 1: 471:12:52, 16 November 2009 (UTC) 454:12:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC) 429:16:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 414:16:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 396:16:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 367:13:55, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 341:23:09, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 316:18:08, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 298:08:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 60:02:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 505: 481:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 71:AfDs for this article: 308:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz 44:The result was 446:Heavyweight Gamer 369: 339: 332: 296: 289: 496: 483: 349: 333: 329: 290: 286: 279: 278: 264: 216: 215: 201: 149: 131: 34: 504: 503: 499: 498: 497: 495: 494: 493: 492: 486:deletion review 479: 337: 294: 221: 158: 122: 106: 103: 101: 69: 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 502: 500: 491: 490: 474: 473: 456: 434: 433: 432: 431: 416: 399: 398: 371: 370: 346: 345: 344: 343: 335: 319: 318: 292: 282: 281: 218: 155: 102: 100: 99: 94: 89: 84: 79: 73: 70: 68: 63: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 501: 489: 487: 482: 476: 475: 472: 468: 464: 460: 457: 455: 451: 447: 443: 439: 436: 435: 430: 426: 422: 417: 415: 411: 407: 403: 402: 401: 400: 397: 393: 389: 384: 380: 376: 373: 372: 368: 364: 360: 356: 352: 348: 347: 342: 338: 331: 327: 323: 322: 321: 320: 317: 313: 309: 305: 302: 301: 300: 299: 295: 288: 277: 273: 270: 267: 263: 259: 255: 252: 249: 246: 243: 240: 237: 234: 231: 227: 224: 223:Find sources: 219: 214: 210: 207: 204: 200: 196: 192: 189: 186: 183: 180: 177: 174: 171: 168: 164: 161: 160:Find sources: 156: 153: 147: 143: 139: 135: 130: 126: 121: 117: 113: 109: 105: 104: 98: 95: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 78: 75: 67: 64: 62: 61: 57: 53: 52: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 480: 477: 458: 437: 374: 350: 325: 303: 283: 271: 265: 257: 250: 244: 238: 232: 222: 208: 202: 194: 187: 181: 175: 169: 159: 108:Andrew Gower 66:Andrew Gower 49: 45: 43: 31: 28: 379:WP:CREATIVE 248:free images 185:free images 326:anything 152:View log 463:Teancum 359:MrKIA11 254:WP refs 242:scholar 191:WP refs 179:scholar 125:protect 120:history 421:Taelus 406:Taelus 388:Taelus 383:WP:IAR 226:Google 163:Google 129:delete 336:matic 293:matic 269:JSTOR 230:books 206:JSTOR 167:books 146:views 138:watch 134:links 16:< 467:talk 459:Keep 450:talk 438:Keep 425:talk 410:talk 392:talk 375:Keep 363:talk 351:Note 312:talk 304:Keep 262:FENS 236:news 199:FENS 173:news 142:logs 116:talk 112:edit 56:talk 51:Cirt 46:keep 276:TWL 213:TWL 150:– ( 469:) 452:) 444:. 427:) 419:-- 412:) 394:) 365:) 357:. 314:) 256:) 193:) 144:| 140:| 136:| 132:| 127:| 123:| 118:| 114:| 58:) 48:. 465:( 448:( 423:( 408:( 390:( 361:( 310:( 280:) 272:· 266:· 258:· 251:· 245:· 239:· 233:· 228:( 220:( 217:) 209:· 203:· 195:· 188:· 182:· 176:· 170:· 165:( 157:( 154:) 148:) 110:( 54:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
Cirt
talk
02:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Andrew Gower
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (2nd nomination)
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (3rd nomination)
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (4th nomination)
Articles for deletion/Andrew Gower (5th nomination)
Andrew Gower
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.