Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Scott: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Realkyhick (talk | contribs) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
<hr style="width:50%;"/> |
<hr style="width:50%;"/> |
||
:<span style="color:Chocolate;">'''Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.'''</span><br/><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Yamamoto_Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] [[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro|会話]] 05:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --> |
:<span style="color:Chocolate;">'''Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.'''</span><br/><small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, [[User:Yamamoto_Ichiro|Yamamoto Ichiro]] [[User talk:Yamamoto Ichiro|会話]] 05:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --> |
||
*'''Delete'''. The page contains 24 external sources of which only 5 mention the subject. Of these, no sources can be used to confirm notability of the subject's biography. [[Special:Contributions/89.252.27.234|89.252.27.234]] ([[User talk:89.252.27.234|talk]]) 08:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 08:54, 5 February 2008
Fails WP:BLP, lack of secondary sources; full of external links which can be considered as WP:SPAM; the only (disputable) notability reason may be related to the reference of opt-in method invention, but simple web-search reveals Ryan Scott Druckenmiller, not Ryan Scott. Mserge (talk) 16:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Plenty of 'sources', but very few reliable ones; and those that are have virtually no mention of Ryan Scott himself. NetCreations may be marginally notable, but Mr. Scott certainly is not. Terraxos (talk) 03:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. Former name was Ryan Scott Druckenmiller. Search using former name provides innumerable reliable sources. Notability is subjective. LevyM (talk) 19:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: How about tagging cleanup/nofootnotes/notability, waiting 2-3 months and re-listing if nothing happens? -- Lea (talk) 05:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Agree with above. This is a borderline case — he might be notable, though this looks a bit like vanispamcruft. Links from Busines Wire are often suspect, since that is merely a "wire service" that distribute press releases, so they are often primary sources. Fix it, then let's revisit the issue. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Comment: How about tagging cleanup/nofootnotes/notability, waiting 2-3 months and re-listing if nothing happens? -- Lea (talk) 05:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 05:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. The page contains 24 external sources of which only 5 mention the subject. Of these, no sources can be used to confirm notability of the subject's biography. 89.252.27.234 (talk) 08:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)