Chip Merlin: I had declined this at AfC and still don't see references showing notability despite being moved to mainspace by another editor.  CNMall41 ( talk ) 00:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Sportspeople ,  and Law .  CNMall41 ( talk ) 00:35, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] * Keep subject meets notability requirements for an athlete and has been covered in a variety of sailing publications and websites.  I feel it is worth noting that off the bat CNMall41 immediately accused me without evidence of having a personal connection to the subject and seems to bear some personal grudge against this article, previously having said they would step away from being involved in the editorial process.  Sailbanshee ( talk ) 01:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Sports career coverage is notable and significant and subject has notable legal and writing career with well cited sources Anatomyoffear ( talk ) 01:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] * Keep Article is well cited and establishes notability as a prominent athlete in the world of yacht racing with a verified track record and unique, well documented story covered in a variety of independent, verifiable sources.  Captbloodrock ( talk ) 04:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks for the vote.  Since you moved to the main space, I am wondering if you can point out the references that specifically show how subject meets WP:GNG .  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 04:35, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] :::Multiple articles covering subject in yachting and boating websites, coverage in major newspapers, documentation of subject competing and placing in major yachting events… Captbloodrock ( talk ) 04:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Okay.  I am asking for the specific ones.  The ones that discuss him in-depth that are considered reliable under Wikipedia standards.  Are you able to point those out? -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 04:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] ::::: The Tampa Bay Times article, the Museler article(s), the article about his obtaining a new ship for an established boat racing team, the multiple articles about his participation and placing in races… I thought the original article author was being paranoid but I’m beginning to side with them there’s some bias on your part against this article’s subject.  I believe this article meets notability requirements which is why I moved it.  I’ve stated my case for such and won’t engage in any more nit-picking.  You put the article up for a vote, let the vote decide.  Captbloodrock ( talk ) 05:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] AfD is a discussion, not a vote.  As far as the WP:aspersions , feel free to take it to WP:ANI .  If you are unable to point out specific references other than naming a publication, I am unsure how to further discuss.   -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 05:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep : Sail magazine and the Tampa Bay Times article (the first two cited) are each WP:SIGCOV .  There appears to be some WP:REFBOMB going on here and improvements need to be made, but there is enough here for this to be kept.  Let'srun ( talk ) 02:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Just to confirm, you are talking about this Tampa Bay Times reference which is a routine announcement about his law firm.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 03:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Article is well sourced and subject meets Wikipedia:Notability (people) for both his law career but especially sports athletic career, which the article documents and cites well with appropriate citations.  IOProfessor ( talk ) 23:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] All right, given that (1) this has been confounded by confirmed socks, (2) the article shows signs of COI, and (3) this is the only thing in your entire edit history, I must ask how you discovered this particular AfD, IOProfessor .  Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  23:12, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting due to confirmation that socks dominated the previous keep ! votes.  Will strike through the sock comments.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  20:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep- as a person who previously voted keep, I’m voting keep again.  And since I am not a sock, I assume it will still be counted.  Anatomyoffear ( talk ) 21:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] User:Anatomyoffear and User:IOProfessor were listed among suspected socks of Captbloodrock but unconfirmed, therefore I did not strike through their remarks.  Note, though, that IOProfessor's only Wikipedia contribution ever was to chime in on this specific AfD.  Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  21:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It’s actually possible for multiple people to disagree with you.  I am in fact my own whole and separate person, and I can see perfectly well that you’re wrong and doubling down.  Let me know if you’d like me to send you a picture of myself and today’s newspaper to prove that I’m a real person and not an evil doppelganger or a figment of your fevered paranoia.  2603:9001:953F:178:B824:2ECE:2DE1:DC7 ( talk ) 21:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If I were doubling down, I would not have reopened this AfD.  This is the opposite of that.  In 16 years as an admin, this is the first time I have ever been persuaded to reopen an AfD, and it is because I read the report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Captbloodrock .  Incidentally, who are you, unsigned user?  Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  21:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Sorry, I was in such a hurry to point out how you’re wrong about me that I posted from my phone, which wasn’t logged in.  But I’m here now.  Hello!  It’s me, the person you think is Captbloodrock.  I am, in fact, not.  Nor am I whoever IOProfessor is, either.  There are a number of other people I am also not, but you haven’t accused me of being any of those, so I’ll leave that be.  Anatomyoffear ( talk ) 21:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] While I hesitate to respond and take this down some rabbit hole of a tangent, I will point out that I only mentioned you to note that despite the inclusion of your name in the sock investigation that I linked, you were not found to be a sockpuppet and therefore I did not strike through your comments.  Now that you have drawn attention, though, I am curious: What drew you to the Chip Merlin AfD after six months away from Wikipedia?  Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  22:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I like lawyer stuff.  I've noted things on other lawyer pages as well.  Ironically, I discovered this guy through his sailing, not his lawyer stuff, but how's that for a small world?  Anatomyoffear ( talk ) 17:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : This one might have legs; [1] is about him and the law firm...  It's hard to filter out all the PR and promo items in searches.  This talks briefly about him [ https://books.google.ca/books?id=qGh0ol-_mCEC&lpg=PA20&dq=%22Chip%20Merlin%22%20-wikipedia&pg=PA20#v=onepage&q=%22Chip%20Merlin%22%20-wikipedia&f=false ].  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Selective Merge to S/V Merlin : There are three topics: the law firm which Merlin founded.  This is possibly WP:NOTEWORTHY given the claim that it is "the second-largest firm in the United States in the field of representing insurance claims for natural disaster victims" -- but not overwhelmingly so (second largest in a single [large] country in a subdomain of a specific domain), and would require WP:NCORP to be clearly met... which it certainly doesn't on current sourcing.  the S/V Merlin which Merlin purchased and which has a long prior history.  The yacht is almost certainly notable, but its article is in need of proper referencing and copyediting for WP:TONE and editing and monitoring for WP:COATRACK ).  Merlin himself, whose level of notability/noteworthiness can reasonably be tied to his law firm, but not to purchasing/owning/operating the yacht ( WP:NOTINHERITED ) ... which gets us onto sources.  Self-published sources don't count as WP:SIGCOV , and nor do sources which are not WP:INDEPENDENT and nor do WP:PASSINGMENTIONS in stories focussed primarily on another topic - this includes Oaktree b 's Tampa Bay Times story & the passing coverage in the ABA journal, and

Discussion outcome: redirect