492:
Well, I looked at it again, and I'm sorry I deleted that--you'll have to admit, though, that it was easy to miss the relevant information in that half-sentence, given that none of the information in the article was organized or formatted according to WP standards (I mean italics, Wiki links, etc.)
397:
Hey, the 156 jobs, that is actually in that article I referenced. Funny how the original author never considered adding anything that might could be called a reference--the ZCard website had nothing that was the least bit informative. And I wasn't going to say anything about that card itself. Or
496:
But note also this: the original entry did not list Katie Wood as a co-author, and there was (is) no actual evidence that his book was 'featured' (nor have I been able to find any). So really, this 'featured,' I am inclined to take that with a grain of salt: the article just does not look
137:
Author shows no inclination to respond to the need to establish notability. I'm willing to be patient, but if we don't soon see citations to independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject, we ought to flush the article, right?
52:
of the facts alleged in the article. His work as a businessman alone is not sufficient for inclusion and there is no verification of his skills as an author. Deletion is without prejudice to re-creation when and if sources are brought forward.
173:
Article appears to describe to me the author of multiple notable books and designer of a notable product. The sourcing needs some work, but the article content appears to indicate the subject passes the third criterion of
265:
the article content is true, he passes the notability test. The problem is I can't easily find any sources to back any of the statements up. If someone can provide sources, I'll happily change this !vote to Keep.
290:
I added a source for that Z-thing. That and two books, that might be enough. But I'm not particularly attached to it, and I am going to cut some fluff in the article (and work on some grammar and style...).
493:
and that the whole thing appeared to be one big run-on sentence. But thanks for cleaning up and restoring. Note also that I did not vote to delete the article, and have added a reference.
354:— Notwithstanding the above (I'm quite sure coincidental) comment I have made the other day, the article cannot exhibit enough significant coverage from secondary sources to establish
197:
130:
416:
The Z-Card web site contains enough information to show notability of Z-Card (i.e. it has references to magazines discussing the product). This is a useful start.
379:
Bad news: Looks like a promotion for something called "Z-card", likely will be deleted. Good news: Wal-Mart bakery will be glad to decorate his birthday cake.
226:
97:
92:
101:
84:
445:
from the
Guardian: a half-sentence which proves that the product exists and that someone bought it. What else is there on the site that I missed?
474:
trimmed it will have missed a relevant fact that I've just restored; that two of his books were featured in a notable TV series.
497:
authoritative, and I have little reason to believe the author(s) at their word. This article still needs independent coverage.
17:
527:
506:
483:
454:
425:
407:
388:
371:
346:
318:
300:
282:
244:
215:
187:
165:
147:
66:
88:
542:
276:
36:
541:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
80:
72:
239:
210:
268:
384:
442:
365:
340:
175:
143:
161:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
441:, and it's impossible to tell where that's from (besides 'Schoenmaker page 16'), and there's
502:
479:
450:
421:
403:
314:
296:
233:
204:
183:
60:
380:
523:
359:
355:
334:
139:
157:
118:
498:
475:
471:
446:
417:
399:
310:
292:
256:
179:
49:
54:
438:
178:. So, unless this is a hoax, this is a clean-up issue, not a deletion one.
519:
48:
While rough consensus is for deletion, there is also a great lack of
535:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
331:
125:
114:
110:
106:
198:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
545:). No further edits should be made to this page.
518:- looks like a conflict of interest at work.
8:
227:list of Authors-related deletion discussions
225:: This debate has been included in the
196:: This debate has been included in the
470:Anyone who has read the article since
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
528:13:02, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
507:16:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
484:13:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
455:16:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
426:13:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
408:02:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
389:23:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
372:20:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
347:20:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
319:20:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
301:20:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
283:19:53, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
245:19:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
216:19:39, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
188:19:23, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
166:19:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
148:19:08, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
67:14:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
156:Notability not established.
562:
538:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
81:George Wallace Mcdonald
73:George Wallace Mcdonald
332:Oh, what the heck?
247:
230:
218:
201:
44:The result was
553:
540:
398:about Shoprite!
368:
362:
343:
337:
275:
255:. I agree with
242:
236:
231:
221:
213:
207:
202:
192:
128:
122:
104:
63:
34:
561:
560:
556:
555:
554:
552:
551:
550:
549:
543:deletion review
536:
366:
360:
341:
335:
273:
240:
234:
211:
205:
124:
95:
79:
76:
65:
61:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
559:
557:
548:
547:
531:
530:
512:
511:
510:
509:
494:
487:
486:
464:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
458:
457:
429:
428:
411:
410:
392:
391:
374:
349:
324:
323:
322:
321:
304:
303:
285:
249:
248:
219:
190:
168:
135:
134:
75:
70:
59:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
558:
546:
544:
539:
533:
532:
529:
525:
521:
517:
514:
513:
508:
504:
500:
495:
491:
490:
489:
488:
485:
481:
477:
473:
469:
466:
465:
456:
452:
448:
444:
440:
436:
433:
432:
431:
430:
427:
423:
419:
415:
414:
413:
412:
409:
405:
401:
396:
395:
394:
393:
390:
386:
382:
378:
375:
373:
369:
363:
357:
353:
350:
348:
344:
338:
333:
329:
326:
325:
320:
316:
312:
308:
307:
306:
305:
302:
298:
294:
289:
286:
284:
281:
280:
279:
272:
271:
264:
263:
258:
254:
251:
250:
246:
243:
237:
228:
224:
220:
217:
214:
208:
199:
195:
191:
189:
185:
181:
177:
172:
169:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
151:
150:
149:
145:
141:
132:
127:
120:
116:
112:
108:
103:
99:
94:
90:
86:
82:
78:
77:
74:
71:
69:
68:
64:
58:
57:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
537:
534:
515:
467:
434:
376:
351:
327:
287:
277:
269:
267:
261:
260:
252:
222:
193:
170:
153:
136:
55:
50:verification
45:
43:
31:
28:
472:User:Drmies
235:Fabrictramp
206:Fabrictramp
176:WP:CREATIVE
288:Weak keep.
241:talk to me
212:talk to me
381:Mandsford
361:MuZemike
336:MuZemike
270:Linguist
140:Dicklyon
131:View log
468:Comment
437:It has
377:Comment
328:Comment
158:ukexpat
98:protect
93:history
46:Delete.
516:Delete
499:Drmies
476:JulesH
447:Drmies
435:Where?
418:JulesH
400:Drmies
356:WP:BIO
352:Delete
311:Drmies
309:Done.
293:Drmies
257:JulesH
253:Delete
180:JulesH
154:Delete
126:delete
102:delete
278:Large
259:that
129:) – (
119:views
111:watch
107:links
56:JodyB
16:<
524:talk
503:talk
480:talk
451:talk
443:this
439:this
422:talk
404:talk
385:talk
367:talk
342:talk
315:talk
297:talk
223:Note
194:Note
184:talk
171:Keep
162:talk
144:talk
115:logs
89:talk
85:edit
62:talk
520:Deb
232:--
229:.
203:--
200:.
526:)
505:)
482:)
453:)
424:)
406:)
387:)
370:)
358:.
345:)
330:—
317:)
299:)
274:At
262:if
238:|
209:|
186:)
164:)
146:)
117:|
113:|
109:|
105:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
522:(
501:(
478:(
449:(
420:(
402:(
383:(
364:(
339:(
313:(
295:(
182:(
160:(
142:(
133:)
123:(
121:)
83:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.