Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Bruce McMahan

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 speedy deleted by User:Newyorkbrad, salted by yours truly; extensive discussion will be needed before considering recreating this article in the mainspace. –MuZemike 02:32, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Bruce McMahan

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Not clearly notable businessman, recreation of previously AFDd page (see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce McMahan (3rd nomination). Some off wiki canvassing is also apparently happening here and here. Falcon8765 ^(TALK) 23:43, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- N/A 0 23:48, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! --24.7.75.209 (talk) 23:56, 8 October 2010 (UTC) I know it's not a ballot, jeeze. Was just trying to be a friendly ip. --24.7.75.209 (talk) 00:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The template was not a response to your comment, but for the overall discussion in general as it's likely to attract people from the reddit links. Falcon8765 ^(TALK) 00:03, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is interesting. I would argue that the question of notability is answered by the existence of multiple articles about the man in numerous publications, but clearly this article needs expansion to elaborate on why he's notable. HorseloverFat (talk)

All the sources are about his alleged relationship with his daughter. Falcon8765 ^(TALK) 00:40, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is absurd. Added CSD G4 tag to article. Sven Manguard _Talk 00:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep What should be in the article, and whether it should contain the accusations against the subject, is a separate question. McMahan is a major philanthropist whose work has been covered in WP:RS. Vrivers (talk) 02:00, 9 October 2010 (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.