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. Kurykh 05:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glenn Hagele[edit]

I have thoroughly read the CRSQA article and it covers everything necessary relating to its owner, Glenn Hagele. This seems to be a vanity page and much of the information provided in regards to news references is all redundant information that seems to have been added to add legitimacy, and is all already contained on the CRSQA page. I feel it is completely unnecessary to create a separate article as Glenn Hagele as a Wikipedia entry is not considered encyclopedic. The general importance of Glenn Hagele is his relationship to the CRSQA and anything independant of that appears to be a resume that is not of much use to an encyclopedia any more than it would be another individual. --SirDecius (talk) 13:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This entry as well as the articles regarding the Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance and LASIK have been subject to repeated vandalism by a small group of individuals, two of which have been sued for defamation and for publishing my personal identity - including Social Security number - on websites they control. With the exception of outside links to mutually relevant news articles at publications that range from US News & World Report to Oprah's Magazine, there is virtually no overlap and each article has unique information. This request for removal is one more act of vandalism and has no basis in Wikipedia rules, governance, or need.

--Ghagele (talk)

Delete, merging anything relevant to Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance. I agree that Glen Hagele's chief notability relates to the CRSQA and Lasik advocacy. The rest of his CV - various corporate posts in the healthcare industry - doesn't look separately notable. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 13:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While there are lots of quotes, there is not much about the subject. He is not notable beyond the average board-certified physician and adjunct college teacher. I don't see how deletion of a bio can be libel; in fact, the contra is true. Bearian (talk) 00:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletions. —User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 17:56, 25 December 2007 (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.