The result was speedy delete. The article is unfortunately a copyvio of http://www.pcmag.com/author-bio/michael-j.-miller . I encourage someone to actually write from scratch a proper article, for I think editor in chief of PC Magasine is pretty close to unquestionably notable. vThere is a difference between merely having a significant position in a company " and being in charge of it. What is really scandalous is that it was here for 6 years before anyone thought to check for copyvio, and was exposed here at AfD for a full month before even the nom looked. I consider that the BEFORE part of Deletion Policy requires before coming here not just a check to see if there are references to be found that would support notability , but a check to see if there is a valid reason for speedy deletion. Anything that look like a canned bio of anyone is, in my experience, more likely than not to be a copyvio. DGG ( talk ) 06:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Article fails WP:GNG and WP:NPEOPLE. The single source in the article gives no assertion of notability, and is nothing more than a very brief mention of a name and position in a "who works for this magazine" section, meaning that this source is not independent of the subject. Sudo Ghost 14:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC) reply
Extreme cases have seen fifteen or more footnotes after a single word, as an editor desperately shores up his point and/or overall notability of the subject with extra citations, in the hope that his opponents will accept there are reliable sources for his edit.
References
The result was speedy delete. The article is unfortunately a copyvio of http://www.pcmag.com/author-bio/michael-j.-miller . I encourage someone to actually write from scratch a proper article, for I think editor in chief of PC Magasine is pretty close to unquestionably notable. vThere is a difference between merely having a significant position in a company " and being in charge of it. What is really scandalous is that it was here for 6 years before anyone thought to check for copyvio, and was exposed here at AfD for a full month before even the nom looked. I consider that the BEFORE part of Deletion Policy requires before coming here not just a check to see if there are references to be found that would support notability , but a check to see if there is a valid reason for speedy deletion. Anything that look like a canned bio of anyone is, in my experience, more likely than not to be a copyvio. DGG ( talk ) 06:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC) reply
Article fails WP:GNG and WP:NPEOPLE. The single source in the article gives no assertion of notability, and is nothing more than a very brief mention of a name and position in a "who works for this magazine" section, meaning that this source is not independent of the subject. Sudo Ghost 14:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC) reply
Extreme cases have seen fifteen or more footnotes after a single word, as an editor desperately shores up his point and/or overall notability of the subject with extra citations, in the hope that his opponents will accept there are reliable sources for his edit.
References