Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Feldman

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 19:11, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shane Feldman[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)

Advertorialized WP:BLP of an organizational founder and motivational speaker, not properly referenced as clearing our notability standards for either endeavour. This is heavily reference bombed to sources that are not support for notability at all, such as YouTube clips and his "staff" profiles on the self-published websites of organizations he's directly affiliated with and glancing namechecks of his existence in sources that are primarily about other people and Q&A interviews in which he's talking about himself or other things in the first person -- and the very few sources that actually represent reliable or notability-supporting media coverage about him are virtually all covering him in purely local interest contexts like organizing a local fundraising event and winning a local youth achievement award in his own hometown, which aren't notability-clinching accomplishments in and of themselves. As always, every founder of a charitable organization is not automatically entitled to have a Wikipedia article -- the notability test is not the things the article says, but the depth and breadth and volume of media coverage about him that can be shown to support the things the article says, and the amount of genuine media coverage shown here is not sufficient to get him over WP:GNG. Bearcat (talk) 15:08, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:08, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:08, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:12, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:13, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per Bearcat. Once you get past the refbombing, there's very little of substance to look at at all. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:12, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Bearcat sets out a compelling case. Thanks for that, as it is all too easy to give these refbombed promo pieces a free pass - making a case for deletion can be hard work. I too am not seeing anything in the article or elsewhere that would enable the subject to pass WP:GNG. As the subject is fairly young, this may turn out to be an example of WP:TOOSOON, but that is not for us to speculate upon here. Edwardx (talk) 11:04, 17 February 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.