Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Welch

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was

Andrew Welch[edit]

This article is written in a barely disguised first-person tone and has no possible interest to others than family & friends of Mr. Welch. All content besides spelling, grammar, and NPOV were submitted anonymously. This is a vanity article submitted as cover for another vanity article (Matt Burch). -- Cleduc 06:37, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC) Though this article has been updated with some interesting information, Andrew Welch is not notable other than as President of Ambrosia Software. This article should be Merged and redirected. -- Cleduc 05:58, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete, even Maelstrom, the sole claim to fame fo the company he is cliamed to be the president of is very close to non-notable. --fvw* 17:27, 2005 Jan 3 (UTC)
    • Maelstrom is hardly the company's "sole claim to fame". It's their first claim to fame. -- Cyrius|✎ 00:36, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. While the Ambrosia Software entry is decently encyclopedic, if nothing else can be said aside that Mr Welch is the president, then the entry is not notable.. The page has been significantly updated, and seems to now show potential as a page (although needing more work). Keep -- Kaszeta 18:44, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as vanity and be done with it. Wyss 04:18, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. His only claim to fame is Ambrosia, which should be covered on Ambrosia's page. --foobaz·✎ 03:47, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Whoa... it's odd randomly running across a series of delete votes that I strongly disagree with. Ambrosia Software is hugely significant within the Macintosh software community, and quite well known. Andrew Welch, as the lead spokesman has shown up all over the place in magazine articles and so forth. I vote Keep with the hope to expand it, and at the very least if you take the article away it should be a redirect and not a total delete. This person is way more notable than gobs of articles in this encyclopedia. DreamGuy 22:24, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)
    • I agree that if it's deleted it should be a redirect. --foobaz·✎ 08:15, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • Why? Right now it's only a placeholder that is only linked to from the Escape Velocity Page. -- Kaszeta 13:53, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Ambrosia Software holds a major place in the Macintosh community for both its games and utilities. The articles on the company and its related entries are being updated and I'm sure that that article will become more than a stub. It certainly was not created by Andrew Welch. Merge and redirect. Norg 13:45, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Creation history shows that it was probably created by Matt Burch when he wrote his own biography (see deletion vote two above): both were created by the same anonymous user at the same time, who somehow knew all about the personal aspirations of Matt Burch. -- Cleduc 17:38, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • Though I stated it in his bio VfD thread, I now don't think this was written by Matt Burch. From what I know of him, it's not his style. Whoever did do it, did a poor job. I've tried to update both this article and the Burch one, the latter being quite spare.-- Norg 21:25, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - But I agree. It does need some fixing. --huwr 22:57, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - Andrew Welch is a friendly, intelligent, committed man. Matt Burch would not create an autobiography like that, he is a very modest man. --Prophile 22:57, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • This vote is Prophile's second edit (his first was on the VfD of Matt Burch). --fvw* 00:04, 2005 Jan 8 (UTC)
      • I suspect that Prophile is a member of the Ambrosia forums and not, as I suspect you're implying, the originator of the original entries. Prophile, would you like to clear that up? --Norg 05:20, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Friendly, intelligent, and committed does not mean notable and suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia, and my position on Andrew Welch stands. The compliment paid to Matt Burch puzzles me - shouldn't that have been made on the Matt Burch vfd page? -- Cleduc 04:47, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • Your position was: This article is written in a barely disguised first-person tone and has no possible interest to others than family & friends of Mr. Welch. All content besides spelling, grammar, and NPOV were submitted anonymously. This is a vanity article submitted as cover for another vanity article (Matt Burch). The article has been significantly altered and clearly has interest to persons aside from friends and family, if these comments mean anything. All the content has been updated, changed and reformatted. The vanity portion is clearly unsubstantiated, but even if it were a mask for the Matt Burch article, it's not so in its current form. Your position falls. --Norg 05:39, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
        • I understand your argument and understand that the article is no longer in its original form. I still don't think Andrew Welch has any notability outside of Ambrosia Software, so I advocate merge and redirect. -- Cleduc 05:58, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
          • I can agree with that. My original vote has been amended above. -- Norg 06:04, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - He who adores Ambrosia's games knows that its fearless helmsman, Andrew Welch, has a place in Wikipedia. So, too, does Matt Burch, but I lack the compassion to edit a Keep in over there, yonder. --129.219.179.173 05:18, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Sorry, but according to the policy, anonymous users' votes don't count. — Ливай | ☺ 14:58, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - Mr. Welch is a fabulous lover, and deserves a spot in the Wikipedia --Steelix 17:08, 8 Jan 2005
  • Likewise, Jesus is not notable other than for founding Christianity, Bill Gates is not notable other than as the founder of Microsoft, and search engine should be deleted and merged with Google. I have significantly updated the contant on Mr. Welch. -- 129.219.179.173 06:14, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
    • Probably a stretch as an analogy. We could attempt to guess the intention of the anonymous user at IP address 129.219.179.173, but it would be easier if s/he would cast a vote. -- Cleduc 09:42, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
      • I have already cast it, above. The analogy was a response to the modified proposal. Therefore, my vote remains Keep rather than merge and redirect. In principle, I think a change in the proposal should be brought up as a new item and thus considering the delete proposition closed. 129.219.231.173 08:57, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
        • See the previous vote by an anonymous user at 129.219.231.173 -- anonymous votes don't count. Cleduc 16:58, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. it is an outrage to suggest Andrew Welch is not of note. User: gaming121
    • User's only edit. RickK 10:26, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment (Note I edited the above two comments to make them conform to the page) gaming, saying it's an "outrage" is going a bit overboard, especially on a free Internet encyclopaedia. If people don't recognize someone, it's kind of hard for them to consider that person "of note." I certainly didn't know who Sharon Turner is, but someone else did.
  • Andrew Welch is of high importance in his field. While some people may not know anything about his field, that doesn't mean he shouldn't have his own page. I'm sure some people haven't heard of Woodrow Wilson, does that mean he doesn't deserve his own page?
    • Though I guess this person wants Keep, there are no votes for anonymous uses (207.218.152.146). --Cleduc 15:26, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Andrew_Welch&oldid=1086056029"