Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pete Koomen

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 Merge and redirect both to Optimizely. I did not protect the redirects, but I will watchlist them to see if protection becomes necessary. --MelanieN (talk) 20:09, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Siroker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

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

Pete Koomen (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)

These were created as part of a set of four related to Optimizely. I don't see either as having notability independent of Optimizely, which is the focus of most of the coverage. I did a merge and redirect to Optimizely, which was undone by the creator. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:46, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I admit I have a conflict of interest here, but both people are clearly notable. A simple Google News[1] search reveals that both Dan Siroker and Pete Koomen have received significant news coverage from reliable sources. Both Pete Koomen and Dan Siroker are founders of Optimizely, a major venture funded tech company which has received significant attention from the press. Aside from Optimizely, the two are serial entrepreneurs, published authors, and notable angel investors in Silicon Valley. Dan Siroker was also a key player in the 2008 Obama campaign and has been quoted in many articles and news stories about politics, most recently on Bloomberg[2] in regards to the upcoming presidential campaign. Salsakesh (talk) 15:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt that there are many hits in google and google news. The issues are the independence of those (PR wire articles and stories that share non-trivial passages with PR wire articles are not independent; neither are non-adversarial interview-based pieces) and whether the focus is on Optimizely or on Pete Koomen / Dan Siroker and whether that focus is in-depth. Note: the bloomberg video doesn't play for me, which may be a technical issue or a region issue. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:18, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Of course there are a few PR wire articles in there, but the vast majority of the sources are from reliable sources such as TechCrunch, Bloomberg, Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Wired, USA Today, CNN Money, and the New York Times. A few of those are as you say, non-adversarial interview based pieces, but that is not a criteria under WP:Reliable. Many of the articles talk about Dan Siroker and Pete Koomen within the context of Optimizely, but many of the articles also talk about their contributions to the 2008 and 2012 Obama campaigns, their angel investing, and their published book. Salsakesh (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the news coverage, both individuals have multiple published works, have contributed to scholarly research, and have been quoted in many published works. See the "Find sources" section above. Salsakesh (talk) 17:42, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete articles and redirect to the company. For Koomen, there is only one substantive article (cite #2); the remainder are mentions. For Siroker it's pretty much ditto -- mentions, but nothing substantive. Basically, they are known for founding the company, but there is very little about them apart from that. LaMona (talk) 01:00, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Both Koomen and Siroker have a number of mentions in both Google Books[3] and Google Scholar[4]. Perhaps the articles can be expanded to include their scholarly contributions. Salsakesh (talk) 01:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Optimizely; there are lots of news mentions, but it's all in relation to their company, passing mentions, etc. —Мандичка^YO 😜 21:05, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I understand this argument... that's like saying Larry Page and Sergey Brin are not notable because they are only well known in relation to their company. Dan Siroker was also recently interviewed on Bloomberg[5] for his expertise in big data and presidential campaigns, and no mention was made of his company. Both Koomen and Siroker also have significant citations in Google Books[6] and Google Scholar[7]. Salsakesh (talk) 16:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: just need a bit more comment to nail down the emerging consensus Spartaz Humbug! 16:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply] Please add new comments below this notice. Spartaz Humbug! 16:12, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Optimizely. Until more sources emerge that (like the BusinessWeek article) provide some personal info on Koomen. This will alsomt certainly happen if the company flourishes. It's just WP:TOOSOON.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note, this discussion is not just about Koomen but also Dan Siroker, who as the CEO of Optimizely naturally has more references than Koomen Salsakesh (talk) 18:45, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - If there is concern about the redirect being revserved prematurely, that would be better addressed by protecting the redirect rather than deleting the articles, especially since there may be material in these articles appropriate to merge with Optimizely. Rlendog (talk) 18:38, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Salsakesh (talk) 18:50, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Salsakesh (talk) 18:51, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Salsakesh (talk) 18:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:20, 29 May 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.