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 Delete. Michig (talk) 18:37, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Byron Stigge (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)

I am not seeing any encyclopedic notability here. Most of the sources fail WP:RS and what doesn't does not meet the in depth requirements for GNG and BASIC. The awards are not major and are for team efforts. He is an engineer, one of many thousands. What am I missing? Ad Orientem (talk) 17:25, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG and fails to state a reason notability should be presumed in lieu of sources under WP:ANYBIO. Sources offered are overwhelmingly WP:PRIMARY or just plain trivial (e.g., the wedding announcement). I agree with nom that the award is not sufficiently significant to confer notability. Subject might qualify under WP:ACADEMIC but a Google scholar search turned up only a few papers, none of which received more than 6 citations. (As a general rule, a significant paper would be one with over 1000 citations, so this isn't even close.) I was unable to find anything helpful on the web or in books. Msnicki (talk) 18:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails WP:BIO and seems more like self-promotion.--Rpclod (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - per nom. I'm sure there are many people who wish they could post such a CV to LinkedIn, but this article appears to be at the wrong site. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 14:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete less than notable, and written in a promotional manner. DGG ( talk ) 00:58, 26 July 2014 (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.