Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Totka

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:58, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Totka

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability. Being an agent for some notable people does not automatically create notability. All but one of the sources on this article are not actually about Totka -- they're just about his clients, and he gets perhaps a brief mention as their spokesman. The one exception, an interview with Totka (the citation has the incorrect URL, correct link is here), is by an unreliable and unnotable publication, and isn't sufficient to indicate notability. IagoQnsi (talk) 07:43, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Again this article has been approved multiple times for several years. User:IagoQnsi has been trolling on wiki pages created by User:JellyFishFilms with a lot of accusations and misinformation. I reviewed the sources and found Ryan Totka to be very notable. Especially in comparison to other Wiki pages of people in his field. PatRoller2 (talk) 09:54, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk note: IagoQnsi2, PatRoller2, JoeMahms, and WikiTorch2 are all suspected sockpuppets of JellyfishFilms; see the SPI I started for details: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JellyfishFilms. -IagoQnsi (talk) 15:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Make that confirmed sockpuppets. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:31, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Struck content from confirmed sock above, per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:40, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:40, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:40, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:40, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as simply nothing for better notability, still not enough even considering the current list of sources. SwisterTwister talk 04:54, 29 March 2016 (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.