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 keep. Met the Heymann Standard. (non-admin closure) Mr. Guye (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Laurie Patton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

no independent notability, see WP:Notability and lots of linkedin and WP:Primary verification Govindaharihari (talk) 07:08, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails notability. Article created by an associate of the subject, and was completely unreferenced until April of this year. The majority of edits to it have been made by an account identified as the organization, associates, and the subject of the article. See diff[1] The references provided are primary, including Linked In and Facebook. Neither the subject nor the organization are notable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Scr★pIron^IV 17:14, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 01:23, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am at a loss to understand why you would delete my entry after ten years. Yes, it was submitted by a (now deceased) business associate and yes I have updated it and added references when it was brought to my attention that the original entry was deficient. I have also asked a number of times for advice on how to provide appropriate information to substantiate the contents. Apart from the activities outlined that I have undertaken over the past 20 years or so I am now the CEO of the not-for-profit peak Australian organization representing everyone who uses the Internet and the Australian chapter of the global Internet Society. I was brought in to increase the organization's profile and effectiveness. I have rebranded the Internet Society of Australia as Internet Australia, appeared before parliamentary inquiries and have had numerous references in newspapers outlining the work of the organization under my leadership. Please let me know if there I anything more that I can do. Respectfully, thanksInternetAU (talk) 05:27, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since you probably have access to Australian sources that would support this article, please provide third-party, neutral sources that can be used to support notability. Use of the sources like linkedin and the organization's own web site are not suitable because they are created by and closely related to the subject of the article. There are specific policies on what sources can be used. You can start with WP:BIO, but there are others that you can follow up on. LaMona (talk) 23:58, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please don't take it personally. Wikipedia has notability guidelines and requires independent reliable verifications also - see WP:Policies and guidelines. Please ask yourself, are you really notable or is the company you work for notable? Have a lot of independent reliable sources written about your life details? If the answer is no then please understand, you warrant a mention in your company article but you don't warrant a wikipedia biography about your life. Regards - Govindaharihari (talk) 05:37, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Govindaharihari| Nothing personal taken, but to answer your questions. Yes, there is ample material on the world wide web about me stretching back twenty years. I don't currently represent a company I run an not-for-profit organization that represents everyone in Australia who uses the Internet. I have appeared before parliamentary reviews and been written about in that context. I was brought in to head up the Internet Society of Australia on the basis of my notoriety; specifically for having undertaken a major review of Indigenous broadcasting for the Australian Government and brokering a significant deal that avoided the certain demise for the National Indigenous Television channel (NITV). I also created and headed up the Australian Community Television Alliance and on behalf of all the community TV stations in Australia I lobbied the Australian Government and against many people's expectation secured access to a digital channel without which community TV would have ceased to exist. At one point someone unknown to me added me to the list of notable Australian television executives. When I look at some of the others on that list and more generally at some of the other people who have entries on Wikipedia I respectfully and as humbly as possible suggest that I am not out of place on Wikipedia in comparison. I hope this helps avoid my being deleted after ten years and would be happy to help substantiate what is on my site. If necessary I can certainly get others to do so too. Thanks InternetAU (talk) 07:06, 20 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.211.86.20 (talk)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• strong delete many of the sources are pure padding and even the use of LinkedIn. The swarming here of single purpose editors with long winded text is a dead giveaway of conflict of interest and in my own experience in years of AfDs a clear indicator of lack of notability. LibStar (talk) 16:47, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as clearly promotional, The cites are beyond ridiculous - Since when has LinkedIN became a source? .... There's plenty of sites to advertise but WP isn't one of 'em!. –Davey2010^Talk 02:15, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Tomwsulcer's rewrite & others improvements - The article's much much better than it was when nominated. –Davey2010^Talk 14:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Agree article is in sad shape but there are many references here in Australian media indicating he easily meets the WP:GNG. Contributors, reading this, who wish to keep the article, suggest strongly that all the poorly referenced stuff is trimmed out, and only referenced content included.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Those are about his company position, not about a notable life in regards to notability for a wp:BLP , a redirect and a mention at the company article Internet Society of Australia is sufficient to report those details. Govindaharihari (talk) 02:18, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For me, the sources suggest he is not simply a "company position" but a major player in Australian business and Internet governance, his views are quoted widely, what he says affects what happens. He's at the confluence of important industries (Internet, business) in a nation of growing international importance.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 09:41, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He is not the subject most of the coverage, it's like a company or police spokesman being notable because he gets quoted a lot in the media. LibStar (talk) 15:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here is in-depth coverage and here too showing Patton easily meets the WP:GNG. He is clearly a major player in Australian Internet media and politics, with numerous references; he is not simply quoted a lot, but he impacts what happens to a considerable extent.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 20:24, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:HEY - all the spurious and self-creates sources have been removed. Upon reading it now, she easily passes WP:GNG. Bearian (talk) 11:35, 1 July 2015 (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.