Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandy Munro

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 no consensus. Daniel (talk) 11:31, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy Munro[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Smells like a promotional article to me. First reference is a press release, second appears to be promotional, third does not seem to match text but does confirm the person is the CEO of a firm they started https://books.google.ca/books?id=KNRSDwAAQBAJ&dq=%22Sandy+Munro%22+Designing+the+Future%2C+McGraw+Hill+Professional+276&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=%22Sandy+Munro%22 Relishcolouredhat (talk) 01:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The creating editor, Andrew Davidson, is a long-term editor in good standing here, who is highly unlikely to have created an article for promotional purposes. This isn't an area in which I edit, but when declining the speedies, I checked the Google Books source and the snippet view implies there's a solid paragraph there. The commonness of the name makes finding sources difficult. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:52, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:28, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:28, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Production engineering is not the sort of topic that is done well on Wikipedia but it's quite important in the real world of manufacturing. The subject is an expert in this and one can find evidence of this over the years in works like Advances in Aluminum Casting Technology (1998) which says "Sandy Munro, one time Corporate Coordinator of Design for Assembly at Ford, attributes first year savings of $ 1.2 billion to DFM. Now a consultant, Munro believes Chevrolet saved almost $6 billion its first year using this strategy..."

Me, I'm checking out electric cars as emission regulations start to bite in London. Munro's analyses and breakdown of new models like Tesla get a lot of attention in the cloud of new media which now follow such developments. Meanwhile, old media produces lightweight junk like Top Gear and Inside the Factory. Tsk.

As for smells, notice that Relishcolouredhat hasn't done anything except try to delete this in the last 9 months. What accounts for their remarkably low productivity?

Andrew🐉(talk) 09:58, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:GNG as it lacks SIGCOV in multiple RS. Mztourist (talk) 12:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not even close to meeting the minimum coverage required by the GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:55, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - well known in auto industry, large youtube channel.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmsyyz (talk • contribs) 13:52, January 21, 2021 (UTC)
Delete. No evidence he passes WP:NBIO. Passing mentions are not sufficient for WP:GNG, either. The subject hasn't done anything to merit an entry in encyclopedia, at least not based on what the article says and what I can see in the sources. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:57, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I am not sure if the nominator or any of the other delete voters in this discussion have done a proper WP:BEFORE. A cursory google research reveal multiple news articles from Inverse, CNet, Jalopnik, Inside EVs, Torque News reveal evidence that there may be sources not already covered by the article itself. All of them appear to acknowledge him as an automobile expert, many specifically featured coverage of his opinions of products from the likes of Tesla in detail which meets WP:SIGCOV, and it is apparent that there is sustained coverage as he has been active for a number of years in the public eye. Per WP:NEXIST, a deletion rationale based on the current state of the article's sourcing does not comply with Wikipedia policy. Haleth (talk) 09:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mztourist and Johnpacklambert. There's absolutely nothing in the article to suggest WP:SIGCOV. Andrew Davidson's failure to WP:AGF is also troubling. —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:47, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Haleth. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 13:22, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep quick search on Google shows that his Tesla Model Y breakdown was reported on by more than one news outlet, and that he is highly regarded in motor industry. Agree that article reads like a promo, however this is an improvement notice not a delete.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 19:00, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is perhaps a little marginal, but industrial engineering is a field where we need much more coverage and where it is difficult to find good references in the usual sources that we have access to, or even know about. In a sense, it's correcting a form of systematic bias. DGG ( talk ) 03:58, 27 January 2021 (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.