Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonas Max Ferris

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 delete. Sandstein 14:53, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jonas Max Ferris

[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)

I did a check for sources after coming across this article and seeing it only uses primary references. I've found only found 3 passing mentions in published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. Those passing mentions have to do with Ferris' company MAXfunds.com, and do not go in depth into this person. If I'm missing a source I'd be happy to be shown it. As of now, appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:BIO as a non-notable TV personality. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 09:53, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 09:53, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 09:53, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 09:53, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - lots of quotes and mentions as a pundit, but no actual WP:SIGCOV of the man himself. Fails WP:BASIC. FOARP (talk) 12:13, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we need more coverage to show notability. Just because you appear on TV does not mean you are notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now. I added a little information. Searching is a little difficult since he has been a financial pundit since 2002.Patapsco913 (talk) 19:47, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Need discussion on the article following Patapsco913's improvements
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:32, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He has been personally discussed in a number of sources beyond just being quoted. The sources added by Patapsco913 discuss a website which he operates which was mentioned at length in several independent secondary sources. He appears to have been a moderately high profile figure in the investment world for some time, beyond just being a pundit. Machetazic (talk) 15:01, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Yet not a single source added by you or Patapsco913 has been in-depth coverage of Ferris himself (merely more coverage of Maxfunds and now a Fox News story Ferris discussed on air once). MaxFunds.com potentially having some notability, and stories Ferris has covered on Fox News getting secondary coverage, are not justifications for Ferris having a stand-alone article himself. So, in no way has the article been improved to our standard of retention. And, I still do not see a path for that to happen here. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 10:18, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per nom. ZXVZ (talk) 18:26, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked sock. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:56, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:58, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Agree with above commenter that the cited additional sources are not actually coverage of Ferris per se but instead of his website. As such my delete vote stands. FOARP (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete there is just not very much in the way of significant coverage coming up in my searches.NotButtigieg (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[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.