Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Peterson (technologist)

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John Peterson (technologist)

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

Non-notable person. He's got some patents. He's written some stuff. He's been 'vice president of product marketing' which seems to involve getting his name and short quotes in lots of technical press. Not one of the references is independent. None of them have in-depth coverage of him as a person. The most interesting claims in the article ("... instrumental in helping design the DoD's largest Firewall infrastructure for the Defense Information Systems Agency and NMCI."; place of birth; USMC background; etc) appear to be entirely unsupported by the references, let alone independent ones. There are many people of this name in both google and google scholar, with no obvious other sources that are clearly this John Peterson. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:50, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Needs better sourcing to justify notability, namely

"inventor of the industries first 10 gigabit Intrusion Prevention System"
"instrumental in helping design the DoD's largest Firewall infrastructure for the Defense Information Systems Agency and NMCI."

Green Cardamom (talk) 07:19, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Independent sources do not establish notability. --Kvng (talk) 02:57, 5 September 2012 (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.