- 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 no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:18, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Peter L. Corsell
- Peter L. Corsell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support for article. Article references appear to be either trivial, lack independence or are not WP:SECONDARY in nature. The awards may support the article, but I question their ability to be enough to support the article. Appears to be a vanity piece created by someone that is creating a series of articles about the same company's management group. reddogsix ( talk) 01:49, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:21, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I think we will find most of the personality posts on wikipedia are usually from a 'related' party. Looking at the references and it seems objective. There are no subjective items like 'he is the coolest guy in the world' :) He is noted personality and written about. That is him on the front cover of Inc. I would say this falls on the right side of the border but I was looking for edits to make but I don't see anything glaring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilyharris ( talk • contribs) 18:19, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Comment - I must have missed him on the cover of Inc., could you provide the reference? The articles that are used as references are either trivial, lack independence or are not WP:SECONDARY in nature. This does not support WP:BIO. reddogsix ( talk) 19:05, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Comment Based on other reviewer comments researched and added additional national secondary article and book publication references: Corsell was quoted in the books "The Clean Tech Revolution" (Wikipedia page: /info/en/?search=The_Clean_Tech_Revolution - see page referenced in citation) as well as "Smart Energy Technologies in Everyday Life", "Environmental Management: Readings and Cases", and "The Plot to Save the Planet: How Visionary Entrepreneurs and Corporate Titans are Creating Real Solutions to Global Warming". Additional secondary source news citations are from Forbes ("It's the Network"), Inc.com ("Being Al Gore: Entrepreneurs offer advice to the veep-cum-venture capitalist"), Washington Business Journal ("Power Surge"), Forbes ("A New Generation Charges Ahead"), and CNNMoney "Fuel was cheap and pollution was free' That's what the world was like when the current energy system was designed, said GridPoint CEO Peter Corsell". In the smart grid industry Corsell has been consistently covered for almost 10 years and is a well known thought leader
Specific reference citations added include: Dumaine, Brian (2008). The Plot to Save the Planet: How Visionary Entrepreneurs and Corporate Titans are Creating Real Solutions to Global Warming. Random House. p. 134. "Being Al Gore: Entrepreneurs offer advice to the veep-cum-venture capitalist". Inc. Magazine. February 1, 2008. "It's the Network". Forbes. September 26, 2007. "A New Generation Charges Ahead". Forbes. January 26, 2009. "Power Surge: The race to discover new ways to create and use energy runs through Washington as investors pump $230M into local firms". Washington Business Journal. September 18, 2006. "'Fuel was cheap and pollution was free' That's what the world was like when the current energy system was designed, said GridPoint CEO Peter Corsell.". CNN Money. April 22, 2009. Russo, Michael V. (2008). Environmental Management: Readings and Cases. SAGE. pp. 281–282.
It appears Corsell was on two Inc. magazine covers - added those to the references as well: http://cometskateboards.com/content/comet-lands-cover-inc-magazine
(see page for links to all references) (EMSguru (talk) 03:02, 23 November 2013 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EMSguru ( talk • contribs)
The support for Corsell meeting the notability requirements is summarized below:
Meets the Basic notability criteria for people (WP:BASIC ) per the detailed references below. “A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject”
All of the following are supported in the cited references at the bottom of the article:
- Subject of independent, reliable, secondary sources: Corsell has been covered in Forbes, CNNMoney, TechCrunch, CNET, multiple Inc. Magazine articles, Washington Monthly, Businessweek, and the Washington Business Journal
- Featured twice on the cover of Inc. Magazine
- Quoted in 6 individual books, among them Hot, Flat, and Crowded by Thomas Friedman (New York Times #1 bestseller) and The Clean Tech Revolution by Ron Pernick and Clint Wilder
Under WP:ANYBIO, Corsell has won the following well-recognized awards:
- Selected as a Young Global Leader by World Economic Forum (he was also Chairman of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on Sustainable Energy)
- Selected for the Innovator Under 35 award in 2008 by MIT Technology Review
- Selected as a Tech Pioneer by Businessweek magazine
-- EMSguru ( talk) 03:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
In addition, following my initial article posting, I have since re-read the page a number of times with an eye to applying the Wikipedia criteria for neutrality line by line and have submitted edits in an effort to remove any questions about language that could be perceived as promotional that isn't a cited, objective fact. Further, edits from the community are, of course, welcome and expected. -- EMSguru ( talk) 03:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch ( talk) 01:39, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch ( talk) 00:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
––––– It appears to me that the concerns about the subject being a "non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support for article" have been thoroughly addressed, and the references show that the subject more than meets the WP:BIO and WP:BASIC criteria. The "vanity piece" concern is a common one on Wikipedia, but this discussion has ensured that the page is factual and meets the criteria. I believe it would be a worse offense to the integrity of information on Wikipedia and its processes to completely delete this page based on a generic concern about conflict of interest even though the information is thoroughly sourced and meets the criteria. I'm sure everyone agrees that it would be better to have other Wiki users edit the page, and in the future hopefully that will be the case. Of course, deleting the page would eliminate that possibility. Thanks for letting me weigh in. Elijahhuntrhodes ( talk) 20:07, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I would like to note that the new references that were added to the page after the original publication are independent and meet the WP:SECONDARY criteria, which was the only argument posted against this. It seems as though additional publications that were secondary and well-known, high-profile, etc were added and thus show the significance of the references. The new references added overcome the original claim that the references were “trivial” and “lacked independence”. I agree with Elijahhutrodes on the fact that we should let this entry go live, and give other Wiki users the opportunity to edit going forward. InboundWeb ( talk) 12:50, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep These possible sockpuppets are killin' me here, oy, and I'm giving the article a good cleaning. I think he passes our general notability guidelines despite how promotional this all feels. LOL. SarahStierch ( talk) 01:30, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 no consensus. Mark Arsten ( talk) 01:18, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Peter L. Corsell
- Peter L. Corsell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support for article. Article references appear to be either trivial, lack independence or are not WP:SECONDARY in nature. The awards may support the article, but I question their ability to be enough to support the article. Appears to be a vanity piece created by someone that is creating a series of articles about the same company's management group. reddogsix ( talk) 01:49, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:20, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 02:21, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
I think we will find most of the personality posts on wikipedia are usually from a 'related' party. Looking at the references and it seems objective. There are no subjective items like 'he is the coolest guy in the world' :) He is noted personality and written about. That is him on the front cover of Inc. I would say this falls on the right side of the border but I was looking for edits to make but I don't see anything glaring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilyharris ( talk • contribs) 18:19, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Comment - I must have missed him on the cover of Inc., could you provide the reference? The articles that are used as references are either trivial, lack independence or are not WP:SECONDARY in nature. This does not support WP:BIO. reddogsix ( talk) 19:05, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Comment Based on other reviewer comments researched and added additional national secondary article and book publication references: Corsell was quoted in the books "The Clean Tech Revolution" (Wikipedia page: /info/en/?search=The_Clean_Tech_Revolution - see page referenced in citation) as well as "Smart Energy Technologies in Everyday Life", "Environmental Management: Readings and Cases", and "The Plot to Save the Planet: How Visionary Entrepreneurs and Corporate Titans are Creating Real Solutions to Global Warming". Additional secondary source news citations are from Forbes ("It's the Network"), Inc.com ("Being Al Gore: Entrepreneurs offer advice to the veep-cum-venture capitalist"), Washington Business Journal ("Power Surge"), Forbes ("A New Generation Charges Ahead"), and CNNMoney "Fuel was cheap and pollution was free' That's what the world was like when the current energy system was designed, said GridPoint CEO Peter Corsell". In the smart grid industry Corsell has been consistently covered for almost 10 years and is a well known thought leader
Specific reference citations added include: Dumaine, Brian (2008). The Plot to Save the Planet: How Visionary Entrepreneurs and Corporate Titans are Creating Real Solutions to Global Warming. Random House. p. 134. "Being Al Gore: Entrepreneurs offer advice to the veep-cum-venture capitalist". Inc. Magazine. February 1, 2008. "It's the Network". Forbes. September 26, 2007. "A New Generation Charges Ahead". Forbes. January 26, 2009. "Power Surge: The race to discover new ways to create and use energy runs through Washington as investors pump $230M into local firms". Washington Business Journal. September 18, 2006. "'Fuel was cheap and pollution was free' That's what the world was like when the current energy system was designed, said GridPoint CEO Peter Corsell.". CNN Money. April 22, 2009. Russo, Michael V. (2008). Environmental Management: Readings and Cases. SAGE. pp. 281–282.
It appears Corsell was on two Inc. magazine covers - added those to the references as well: http://cometskateboards.com/content/comet-lands-cover-inc-magazine
(see page for links to all references) (EMSguru (talk) 03:02, 23 November 2013 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EMSguru ( talk • contribs)
The support for Corsell meeting the notability requirements is summarized below:
Meets the Basic notability criteria for people (WP:BASIC ) per the detailed references below. “A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject”
All of the following are supported in the cited references at the bottom of the article:
- Subject of independent, reliable, secondary sources: Corsell has been covered in Forbes, CNNMoney, TechCrunch, CNET, multiple Inc. Magazine articles, Washington Monthly, Businessweek, and the Washington Business Journal
- Featured twice on the cover of Inc. Magazine
- Quoted in 6 individual books, among them Hot, Flat, and Crowded by Thomas Friedman (New York Times #1 bestseller) and The Clean Tech Revolution by Ron Pernick and Clint Wilder
Under WP:ANYBIO, Corsell has won the following well-recognized awards:
- Selected as a Young Global Leader by World Economic Forum (he was also Chairman of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Council on Sustainable Energy)
- Selected for the Innovator Under 35 award in 2008 by MIT Technology Review
- Selected as a Tech Pioneer by Businessweek magazine
-- EMSguru ( talk) 03:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
In addition, following my initial article posting, I have since re-read the page a number of times with an eye to applying the Wikipedia criteria for neutrality line by line and have submitted edits in an effort to remove any questions about language that could be perceived as promotional that isn't a cited, objective fact. Further, edits from the community are, of course, welcome and expected. -- EMSguru ( talk) 03:18, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch ( talk) 01:39, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch ( talk) 00:58, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
––––– It appears to me that the concerns about the subject being a "non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support for article" have been thoroughly addressed, and the references show that the subject more than meets the WP:BIO and WP:BASIC criteria. The "vanity piece" concern is a common one on Wikipedia, but this discussion has ensured that the page is factual and meets the criteria. I believe it would be a worse offense to the integrity of information on Wikipedia and its processes to completely delete this page based on a generic concern about conflict of interest even though the information is thoroughly sourced and meets the criteria. I'm sure everyone agrees that it would be better to have other Wiki users edit the page, and in the future hopefully that will be the case. Of course, deleting the page would eliminate that possibility. Thanks for letting me weigh in. Elijahhuntrhodes ( talk) 20:07, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I would like to note that the new references that were added to the page after the original publication are independent and meet the WP:SECONDARY criteria, which was the only argument posted against this. It seems as though additional publications that were secondary and well-known, high-profile, etc were added and thus show the significance of the references. The new references added overcome the original claim that the references were “trivial” and “lacked independence”. I agree with Elijahhutrodes on the fact that we should let this entry go live, and give other Wiki users the opportunity to edit going forward. InboundWeb ( talk) 12:50, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep These possible sockpuppets are killin' me here, oy, and I'm giving the article a good cleaning. I think he passes our general notability guidelines despite how promotional this all feels. LOL. SarahStierch ( talk) 01:30, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
- 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.