Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Booth

Larry Booth

Larry Booth was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete.

This is a basic resumé for a non-notable architect. His firm Booth Hanson does not have an article, so why should he? I went to Harvard for architecture too; that doesn't mean I should have a Wikipedia entry. Gsd97jks 17:32, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Article does not establish notability. Delete, without further evidence. Katefan0 21:22, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. CV of someone who doesn't seem to have done anything notable. [[User:David Johnson|David Johnson [T|C]]] 00:27, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete --fvw* 02:22, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)
• Delete: CV's are expressly forbidden, although if he's a lecturer at the ivies on architecture, he probably has done something worthy of note. We're not told what it is, though. (With a degree in architecture in 1960, he would have to be in his late 60's by now, so not likely vanity.) Geogre 05:11, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

please note there are hundreds of people who lecture at those architecture schools each year, many of whom are not particularly notable. Until I see an article about his firm, or even about one of the other "Chicago Seven architects" (several of whom are far more well-known, such as Stanley Tigerman or James Freed), I'm not buying it. Gsd97jks 18:34, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.