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 CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC) reply

George Douglas Scott

George Douglas Scott (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

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

The article contains minimal content. The subject does not pass notability. The References only make passing mention of the article subject and do not infer notability directly upon the article subject. Ref 4 refers to the subject being one of a number of people who won an award - however winning an award does not by itself infer notability. There does not appear to be wide coverage of this individual. isfutile:P ( talk) 15:33, 7 November 2015 (UTC) reply

One reference is Profile: Doug Scott of Tedco on Tyneside - is that a "passing mention"? All the best: Rich  Farmbrough, 00:33, 8 November 2015 (UTC). reply

Speedy keep as nominations seems to be in bad faith. All the best: Rich  Farmbrough, 00:33, 8 November 2015 (UTC). reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 06:27, 8 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 06:27, 8 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Redirect to Queen's Award for Enterprise Promotion#The Queen's Award for Enterprise Promotion 2010. Even though the Queen's Award does confer some notability, there are guidelines other than WP:GNG to consider. For example, because all four of the sources cited in the article were published in the immediate wake of the award, WP:BLP1E becomes relevant. And so is WP:NOPAGE. Other than its discussion of the Queen's Award, all of the detail in the article is unencyclopedic -- where he attended university, his early jobs as a programmer and librarian, etc. Brief biographical data and a quote from the Queen's Award booklet could easily fit in a list of the 2010 awardees. By the way, the Financial Times profile was behind a paywall, so I didn't read it. But it is used only once in the article, as one of two sources for a paragraph containing biographical detail. Most of that detail could equally well have been sourced from the Journal article, so it isn't clear what additional information was being added by the FT profile. And finally, I note that the article Queen's Award for Enterprise Promotion (2010) already exists as a redirect to the article on the Queen's Award. Perhaps the better solution is to expand that redirect article into an article on all of that year's awardees, where brief biographical sketches on each awardee can be included. NewYorkActuary ( talk) 19:16, 13 November 2015 (UTC) reply
• Redirect for NewYorkActuary. Some say the award is good enough, some don't, so we can't really say that it means probable notability. The sources do not show major significance of individuals winning the award. Rainbow unicorn ( talk) 16:55, 14 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Won a Queen's Award that is only given to one person a year to honour a lifetime of promoting enterprise in the UK. This level of national recognition is sufficient in itself to establish notability.-- Andreas Philopater ( talk) 22:35, 24 November 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.