Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Weiss (Streamcast)

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. Drmies (talk) 02:12, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Weiss (Streamcast)

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

Apparently promotional BLP without sources - there's literally one RS mentioning Weiss himself with no bio details. No evidence or claim of notability as an individual. Been this way since creation in 2009 by Mbweiss. We can't keep a BLP in this state. I would have just PRODed it, but it already had a BLPPROD. David Gerard (talk) 14:02, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 14:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 14:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 14:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 14:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 14:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Agree that in it's present condition it is promotional, but since Streamcast is in the article title along with his name, that's what I searched for. The results indicate that Streamcast is notable, but we already have an article about StreamCast Networks and an article for Morpheus (software) as well, so maybe a redirect would be the better choice, instead of deletion. Sources found: USA Today, Los Angeles Times, , Tech Dirt, Tech News World, Variety and Billboard made this observation - In what may be remembered historically as the most significant copyright case for the entertainment industry, the Supreme Court sided 9-0 in favor of copyright holders, and against peer-to-peer software providers StreamCast and Grokster.-- Isaidnoway (talk) 17:41, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirecting to Streamcast is the obvious thing to do here, though this title really gets very few hits - David Gerard (talk) 18:15, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and then Redirect only if needed as there are by all means nothing actually emphasizing how he's independently convincing and notable. SwisterTwister talk 06:03, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- a largely unsourced BLP, which is overly promotional. Sources are insufficient to meet individual GNG, outside of the two companies. I would not support a redirect to StreamCast Networks as I'm not sure if the company is notable either. Morpheus may be notable, but I would not consider a redirect as needed or advisable. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:08, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Streamcast was pretty notable and well-covered back in the day, more so than you'd think from the article; it'd be a reasonable target, except as I note above this present title gets almost no hits - David Gerard (talk) 10:34, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per comment above, a redirect to StreamCast Networks would be acceptable, although I'd still prefer deletion. But not a big deal either way. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:54, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Set it on fire and then redirect or not redirect is totally fine by me :-D - David Gerard (talk) 01:14, 29 August 2016 (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.