This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.
Folks, isn't the 24/7 Wall St reference of "Worst CEO in American History" a tad too harsh considering that the Wall St 24/7 isn't that notable or even has a wikipedia page? I recommend we remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Why was the Wikipedia subject Particpation Age merged with Jonathan Schwartz? This makes no sense. The concept of the Participation Age, while officially coined by Jonathan, and part of Sun Microsystems' marketing message, is not part of Jonathan's identity. Note Cisco Systems has released a very similar marketing message, the Human network, and it does not redirect to John Chambers. Not only that, the founder of Wikipedia endorsed the concept of the Human network on Wikia.
Evidentally the topic is not notable enough to exist on its won to redirects to its most closely linked relation. SGGHspeak! 17:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
That's a pretty big "only." I don't see a lot to justify Tim Cook having his own article other than being the CEO of Apple, yet I wouldn't contest it.
Schwartz' tenure at Sun, even prior to his becoming CEO, put him in the news on a regular basis. I think there's enough here to continue to rate a standalone article. The Sun Microsystems article is already plenty long.--NapoliRoma (talk) 19:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Mbstone – you don't know what you are talking about, or you are trying to insult Jonathan Schwartz. He is obviously notable. gnirre (talk) 08:40, 5 May 2012 (UTC)