Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg the Architect

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 to Tibco Software. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:57, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greg the Architect

Not enough notability to merit it's own article; some content could be incorporated into Tibco Software. Speedy deletion was contested, though most references are blogs. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to Tibco Software. Not notable enough as a stand alone article, is a product of Tibco. AFD not even needed for this. PHARMBOY (TALK) 19:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I sent it here because the speedy delete had already been contested by the creator; I thought it might be prudent to establish a consensus to avoid a revert war. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:18, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oh, no problem. I am sure merge would have been contested, too, but seems to be the right move. PHARMBOY (TALK) 20:47, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect Agree with editors above, would be more useful as a part of Tibco than on its own.--Terrillja (talk) 21:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect. Needs more reliable sources for subject to have own article. Not far away though. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 22:53, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Perhaps he and Joe the Plumber can meet someday. Mandsford (talk) 00:59, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Notice who nominated that article for deletion (sigh). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 03:46, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would be bold and just redirect and NAC close this, but I get the feeling the creator would raise hell. Will leave to an admin to do this, early or not. PHARMBOY (TALK) 01:22, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional characters-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:12, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:12, 19 October 2008 (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.