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. listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. I'm going to interpret Peridon's comment as a "weak keep" so I don't have to say "no consensus". (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Tobias[edit]

Non-notable small-scale investor and self promoter, so fails to meet WP:N. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiJeffMa (talk • contribs) — WikiJeffMa (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Strong Keep I agree that the article is poorly sourced and needs desperate work. But a wealth of good sources exist, and the article could be easily cleaned up--and I don't think comes close to a candidate for deletion. google news archive search shows a wealth of articles in high-profile publications, including some written about him in depth: [1] in BusinessWeek. Articles cover him in all different regards, as CEO of Imperial Renewables: [2], others discuss him as an investor, his ability to raise funds: [3]. This is above and beyond what is required to establish notability: detailed coverage in multiple reliable sources, found with very little effort. Cazort (talk) 20:18, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment One source not listed is http://cleantech.com/news/2238/martin-tobias-out-at-imperium (perhaps not surprisingly). This would seem to support notability, although probably not in the way the creator of the article intended. There's likely to be more like this out there, if anyone cares to dig. I might do a bit more tomorrow when I get back home. Peridon (talk) 21:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the sentiment, in my scan of the sources I found, there was negative coverage too. I think it is important to incorporate this sort of material into the article as well...NPOV means presenting all perspectives that have substantial coverage in reliable sources. Cazort (talk) 02:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 23:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:33, 7 July 2009 (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.