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. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 06:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Bottomley[edit]

Henry Bottomley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Does not assert notability as per WP:BIO. The relationships with other notable people are irrelevant as notability is not inherited WP:NOTINHERITED and the relationships are purely family, rather than working, and while Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences may be notable again, that does not confer notability on people associated with it. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 17:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, per nom. PKT (talk) 20:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete 4 years as a local councilor seems to be his best claim; not quite good enough in my book. Brianyoumans (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, neutral, I checked his website and he does not appear to have any publications. Changed vote following Jitse esp introduction of Bottomley projection.--Salix alba (talk) 09:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there seem to be three non-automatic incoming links which would go red, plus several mentions at Google Scholar [1], even ignoring the 19th century patents. --Rumping (talk) 11:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Abstain, leaning towards deletion. There are quite a number of things that may together make a case for notability: participation in the International Mathematical Olympiad, the Bottomley projection, his work on magic series and other work on recreational mathematics (though the associations with Florentin Smarandache make me wary), family connections, his political career. On the other hand, if there are no secondary sources then the article should probably be deleted. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete --If the Bottomley projection were widely talked about, that would give him notability. However, it seems even less notable than he is. No citations in the Bottomley projection article except to Bottomley's own work, and very few ghits, most of which are trivial or taken from wikipedia. LeSnail (talk) 15:35, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepIf Bottomley projection is notable (and it has not been proposed for deletion), then its inventor is. MikeHobday (talk) 10:54, 13 January 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.