Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrey C. Hicks

: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. The arguments for deletion are stronger.--Kubigula (talk) 03:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

=[[Andrey C. Hicks]]=

:{{la|Andrey C. Hicks}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Andrey C. Hicks}})

He sounds like he was a successful student who later founded a small business, but I don't see anything in this article that asserts notability. The sources cited are all either trivial mentions of his name or self-published. Brian the Editor (talk) 22:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

{{afdanons}}

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. —Brian the Editor (talk) 22:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. —Brian the Editor (talk) 22:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —Brian the Editor (talk) 22:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

:A) He is not his branding agency, or Humphries. B) Notability is not inherited. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete - unremarkable businessman, no reliable coverage - article reads like a borderline advertisement. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete: per above ... and to boot, the article has the all-too-usual WP:PEACOCK issues. For instance, the business is "focused on the development and execution of systematic trading strategies." In other words, it sells things. Sheesh.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  00:35, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment: Hedge funds don't actually "sell" things. I work in the industry as a recruiter and the fund and Mr. Hicks are definitely notable. Stephen A. Cohen and James Harris Simons are both hedge fund managers that have articles on Wikipedia and I can assure you that neither are "unremarkable" businessmen. Brpostings (talk) 00:44, 29 July 2011 (UTC).— Brpostings (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Comment: If the subject is notable, then perhaps you can - as WP:V requires - provide links to reliable third-party magazine or newspaper articles saying so, by discussing him in the "significant detail" required. Whether other fund managers have achieved notability is beside the point; this AfD is not about them. If he should keep a low profile as the SPA below claims, that's up to him, but notability as Wikipedia defines it involves being noticed by the public at large through such sources.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  15:38, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Keep I am also a recruiter in the hedge fund space and believe that the article is notable. It is important to have transparency in this industry so I thank Brpostings for the data mining. Also, note that most hedge fund managers maintain a low profile. Soniceko (talk) 01:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC).— Soniceko (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete No significant coverage and few secondary sources. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 02:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment: Just FYI, the second SPA just created redirects for Andrey Christopher Hicks and Andrey Hicks, which will have to be deleted with the main article when the AfD closes out.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  15:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Keep The research article and ISEF award make it notable. The article seems to be edited recently to highlight such. Ecw7283 (talk) 21:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC)— Ecw7283 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Keep Agreed, the research article and ISEF award make it notable. Brad eerashin (talk) 21:21, 29 July 2011 (UTC)— Brad eerashin (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Comment. The ISEF award [http://www.societyforscience.org/page.aspx?pid=447] was for $1000 when the subject was at high school. Not remotely sufficient. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:17, 30 July 2011 (UTC).
  • Comment: To quote from the relevant guideline: "Victories in academic student competitions at the high school and university level as well as other awards and honors for academic student achievements (at either high school, undergraduate or graduate level) do not qualify ..." for notability. The level of science awards which DO confer notability are Nobel Prizes, MacArthur Fellowships, Bancroft and Pulitzer Prizes, Fields Medals and the like. A shared "third place" high school prize isn't remotely close.  ῲ Ravenswing ῴ  04:22, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete Usually a number of SPAs popping up to defend a bio is a sure sign of lacking notability and this one is no exception. Apparently a good high-school student. Absolutely no independent sources after that. Misses WP:PROF, WP:BIO, and WP:GNG. --Crusio (talk) 10:18, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable. Hairhorn (talk) 17:53, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete. Does not seem to pass notability requirements under WP:PROF or WP:BIO. No citations, and no significant news coverage. Seems like an attempt to use WP as mini-resume holder for self-promotion. The “keeps” above are rather unreliable and don’t make a significant case. Not all hedge fund managers in the world are WP-notable.--Eric Yurken (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete. Meets none of the standard guidelines. Note that "managing money", even lots of it, is not inherently notable. This seems to be the confusion for many of the above SPA commentators. Appears to be a vanity page. Uncontroversial delete. Agricola44 (talk) 15:11, 1 August 2011 (UTC).
  • Delete. Does not fulfill Notability for either academics or businesspersons, early life section full of trivial details, not every Harvard graduate/hedge fund manager is notable enough to merit a Wikipedia article. Shearonink (talk) 07:14, 3 August 2011 (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.