Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wes Schroll

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. Deleting this based on lack of coverage and such to qualify for WP:GNG. If someone wants to "morph" it into something else, I'm happy to userfy for you, just ask.

Thanks everyone for participating in this discussion and assuming good faith. If you disagree with this decision please take it up at Wikipedia:Deletion review versus my talk page. Thanks and happy holidays! Missvain (talk) 17:32, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wes Schroll[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)

Non-notable WP:VANISPAM with very poor references barely mentioning the subject's name. A fabulous fail of the google search smell test. Can you say "paid spammer"? db'd, prod'd, and had a fight with ClueBot and a couple of editors (admins?). WTF Wikipedia? Such an obvious case of vanispamcrutisement and we need to go to the high court about this? Weregerbil (talk) 19:32, 22 November 2021 (UTC)}}[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable person, even if the creator had a COI (and we don't know that they do). I fixed the titles in the references; evidently the creator thought that "title" referred to the publication's name rather than the article's title. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:15, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~. (changed to Morph, below) Not sure why this is considered vanity cruft. It passed the "Google search smell test" for me. There are plenty of references from Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Business Insider, and others. They mention the company Fetch Rewards, which doesn't have a wikipage. As the CEO, it seems plenty of solid publications have recognized him as notable. I could use more elaboration on the rationale for deletion. _signed, Willondon (talk) 21:41, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Heavily WP:PROMO and agree about the COI. The author of the page claims the photo of the founder as their own work. Most of the sources talk about his company; the one detailed bio is from a local paper. I'd say WP:TNT and try again with an article about Fetch Rewards which likely passes WP:ORG. -- Bob drobbs (talk) 22:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~. (changed to Delete, below) I poked through a few references (not all), which were solid and significant coverage, with one exception that I removed. This article may well have been created as a WP:PROMO, but it's factual, and Forbes' top 30 under 30 is not exactly insignificant. -- asilvering (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering:The 30 under 30 is not a single list; there are 20 categories.[1] So, he got a brief mention as one of 600. It's a datapoint, but doesn't seem to do all that much to establish his notability. -- Bob drobbs (talk) 04:01, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is an AfD on Schroll, not Fetch Rewards: all the sources I can find are about his company, but not actually about Schroll and there is little significant coverage of him. Looking at the sources raised by Willondon – from The Wall Street Journal: "Mr. Schroll dropped out of college to pursue the business"; from Business Insider: "Schroll dropped out of the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2013 to build the company"; from Reuters: not even a mention of his name. Cycling through the other sources, the two Biz Journals give quotes by Schroll, but don't say anything about him; the Wisconsin State Journal only says he and his partner are "UW-Madison students"; one source is puffery from an alumni magazine; Forbes says "Schroll met his cofounder Tyler Kennedy in college and Schroll dropped out of the University of Wisconsin, Madison to build Fetch in 2013"; Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel says "Wes Schroll founded the consumer loyalty and reward app while he was a business student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 2013 ... He dropped out of college to work on Fetch Rewards full time". That's it.
That's before we take into consideration that the community has decided there is no consensus on Business Insider's reliability. So to summarise: we have a couple of sentences from two reliable sources, one halfway-decent-but-local source, and no significant coverage elsewhere. He does not meet the general notability guideline. Passing mentions are simply not enough. Sdrqaz (talk) 03:48, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Morph into an article on Fetch Rewards. After seeing the comments above, I can see where the subject Wes Schroll would fail notability guidelines. But it seems there's a lot of information on a subject (Fetch Rewards) that many solid publications deem notable. I suggest that much of the article be used to create an article on Fetch Rewards. Willondon (talk) 04:18, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Alright, I see the rationale about the company vs Schroll himself being trouble for calling it "significant coverage". But turning this into an article on Fetch Rewards would be laundering the work of a suspected COI editor, who has not responded to this AfD (and so, seems unlikely to do that work themselves). I'm sure everyone else can think of better ways to spend their time. -- asilvering (talk) 04:37, 29 November 2021 (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.