Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Barnard

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 07:47, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Barnard[edit]

[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)

According to Colin Fine

Wikipedia articles do not belong to their subjects, their subjects have no control over their contents, and they should be based almost 100% on what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to publish about them. If an article happens to help the person who is its subject in some way, that is a fortunate accident, but Wikipedia articles are absolutely not for the benefit of their subject.

This page violates:

The Wikipedia page is self serving. This biography was extensively edited by Jason Barnard as well as his business partner Anton Shulke for the sole purpose to add high authoritative links from Wikipedia to Jason’s web mentions in which he is a Digital Marketer promoting paid courses on increasing your brand presence in Google with the backbone strategy of getting a Wikipedia page created.

Searching for Jason and Anton will show their business relationship with Kalicube, Kalicube is linked in the Wikipedia page to add authority for this page and site to rank better.

The majority of links on the Wikipedia page are disproportionately in the Digital Marketing section to benefit himself. MerrilAcky (talk) 21:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NOTLINKEDIN. No evidence of notability, either as a businessman or an artiste. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 11:01, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not supposed to be LinkedIn. I am not confident enough to say it is not at present considering how little oversight and monitoring we have on articles on living people. The fact we have nearly 1 million biographies of living people, and some have existed over a decade with no reliable sourcing is a big problem.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:59, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTRESUME and WP:MILL. In 2007, this would be excused, but in 2020, everybody knows we are not a LinkedIn substitute. This is a run of the mill person is business. Bearian (talk) 20:12, 21 July 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.