Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Andrew Jestyn Phillips

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 and no indication any further input is forthcoming. Star Mississippi 17:34, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Andrew Jestyn Phillips

[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)

Despite the very impressive list of roles, they're all support roles or trusteeships, with only CUP presented as a CEO position. Coverage is passing, CVs or corporate announcements. WP:BUSINESSPERSONOUTCOME - "Corporate presidents, chief executive officers and chairpersons of the boards of directors of companies listed in the Fortune 500 (US) or the FTSE 100 Index (UK) are generally kept as notable." CUP is not FTSE listed . Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:52, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, News media, and Business. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:52, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to suggest a weak keep. I do appreciate that this is a good-faith nomination that will probably lead to much healthy discussion; and it's tricky, because the majority of information about him is indeed various corporate announcements. However, I think we need to look at the bigger picture. It is not right to view CUP from the perspective of a FTSE 100 company. Its significance isn't measured by share value and pounds. Its significance is two-fold; firstly it is one of the five main UK examining boards, which makes the CEO position extremely influential in UK education (and outside UK too). Secondly, the CUP is the world's oldest publisher and printer, and it gave up actually printing things during Phillips' reign, which means our readers may have curiosity about who was in charge at this historically-meaningful moment. His trusteeships are not run-of-the-mill (Nuffield foundation; can't get much more influential than that). We would accept him as notable had he been editor of a journal, and yet as CEO of a publisher of many journals, and former president of The Publishers Association we don't. If he'd been any one of the things he'd been, I'd happily delete, but his career has tentacles in so many parts of UK education, media and health, and at such high levels, that I think it almost expected we should have something to say about him. And it's impossible to reduce him to a redirect, because there are too many targets. The difficulty is making sure that the sourcing for an article about him is good, and not entirely press-releases, given that this sort of career creates a lot of routine press. Elemimele (talk) 12:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:25, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As AfC approver I will not vote but I would like mention that I approved it based on the notability of CUP which is also the Queen's Printer and was granted letters patent in 1534.Gusfriend (talk) 07:26, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: To note that CUP is one of the world's biggest and most influential academic presses (only Oxford is larger), and that Phillips is now CEO of the larger merged Cambridge University Press & Assessment, with a combined turnover in excess of $1bn per annum, notwithstanding the wider academic and cultural significance of the organisation. Suggest keep. Cmdcam01 (talk) 15:40, 5 July 2022 (UTC)Cmdcam01[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.