Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Schreiber

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 of the debate was redirectto Pitchfork Media. Mailer Diablo 03:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Ryan Schreiber

Contested prod. Subject is nn. Eusebeus 01:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as nn hipster doofus. dbtfz^talk 02:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Redirect as hipster doofus, per below. dbtfz^talk 06:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
• MergeRedirect to Pitchfork Media. No reason for a 1 liner and a picture to be a standalone article and not a lot of potential for expansion here.--Isotope23 02:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Scheiber content at Pitchfork Media is already superior to this article... nothing to merge.--Isotope23 02:38, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Comment the Pitchfork site seems to be notable enough, having an Alexa rank of 3834, does that notability carry over to the guy in charge? In any case, there's gotta be a better picture of this guy. --Deville (Talk) 02:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect and never look at the pic again. Deizio 02:47, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Retain as a redirect per Isotope. Notability would not carry over to the man unless he has been written about in multiple non-trivial reliable source-type publications. Thatcher131 03:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. Should have been redirected as an editorial decision. Bringing it here wasn't necessary. Jkelly 04:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect per Jkelly, and remind nominator to be bold in cases that don't really need consensus. Kuzaar 16:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect per above. The person has no notability aside from being Pitchfork's editor, so he certainly doesn't need his own article when there's already content about him in the Pitchfork article. -- Kicking222 21:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as a notable hipster doofus that meets WP:BIO guidelines, with press coverage outside of Pitchfork [1] [2] [3] as well as being one of the lucky few to nominate for the New Pantheon Award [4]. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 01:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect per Isotope23. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 06:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

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.