Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandon Fleisher


 * 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. Missvain (talk) 05:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Brandon Fleisher

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a person with no strong claim to passing Wikipedia's inclusion rules for businesspeople — starting your own business at age 17 is not in and of itself a notability freebie if the business isn't notable enough to get over WP:CORP. Of the article's four sources, #1 is his own website, a primary source that cannot confer notability; #2 is a video clip in which he's the interviewee rather than the subject of the piece, which accordingly does not count toward notability either; and #4 is a straight reprint of #3 in a news aggregator. Which leaves us with one appropriately reliable source (#3), but one source is not enough to get a person over WP:GNG. In addition, with the article having been created by User:Investor101, there's a high probability of conflict of interest here — especially with the creator also uploading a photo of the subject with the credit given as "own work". A very similar version created by User:Financefinance (also suggesting a COI), worded differently and entirely unreferenced but still based on the same weak notability claim, was speedied in October for lacking a serious claim of notability. Since this one at least has an actual reference in it, it's not quite eligible for the same treatment — but it's still a delete. Bearcat (talk) 00:46, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk  02:48, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. N ORTH A MERICA 1000 10:52, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter123    (comment)  @ 13:12, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Shouldn't be deleted. For the tv thing yes he was the interviewee but he was also the subject. He was also talked about in an article from Ozy recently http://www.ozy.com/fast-forward/fun-futuristic-ways-to-invest/38138 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.48.47 (talk) 05:42, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * — 99.226.48.47 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I suppose that might count for something if Ozy.com counted as a reliable source at all. And an interview never counts toward notability at all — because of the self-promotional aspect, it's valid for additional confirmation of facts after you've adequately covered off the notability issue with enough sources to pass GNG, but it counts for exactly zero toward the meeting of GNG. Bearcat (talk) 21:49, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok, well then is USA Today a reliable source? http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/personalfinance/2015/01/27/ozy-investment-education-geared-toward-millennials/22402783/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.48.47 (talk) 22:54, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - surely the Telepgraph source is reliable Gbawden (talk) 09:10, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't say it wasn't — but it takes significantly more than one or two sources to claim a WP:GNG pass. If the person hasn't cleanly passed a subject-specific inclusion rule, then there have to be a lot more than just one or two RS to claim notability on "just because media coverage exists" grounds. Bearcat (talk) 19:01, 29 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. The only reason he's attracted minor press attention is for being a wunderkind doing something otherwise ordinary and non-notable: playing the stock market. Pax 01:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - in an AfD discussion I started Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stinson Hunter, a Keep vote was made with the comment "Well-known enough to be the subject of a recent documentary on national television". Fleisher was the subject of a live prime time television interview so if it applies to that AfD it should apply here too. Gbawden (talk) 12:26, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
 * There's a difference between a full-fledged half-hour or longer documentary, in which other people are talking about you, and merely being an interview guest, in which you're speaking about yourself, in a segment on a news program. For instance, you don't have to be well-known to be an interview guest on the news — all you have to do is be involved in the topic under discussion in some way. And even in Hunter's case, my read on the situation is that regardless of whether you accept the documentary itself as sufficient notability, the resulting Wikipedia article still isn't reliably sourced enough. Bearcat (talk) 21:46, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 19:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Keep - More reliable sources have been added since it was originally put on AfD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.48.47 (talk)
 * Delete - There is not enough here to meet notability standards for Wikipedia. The mention in USA Today is just a mention. The "wunderkind" angle is more human interest than solid news. There are probably tens of thousands of individual investors who had, in the short term, doubled their initial investment. Let's check back on this fellow in ten years and see if he's done something significant. LaMona (talk) 17:53, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Philosopher Let us reason together. 22:59, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - The fact that he did this at the age of 17 is what makes it notable. There are many adults that double their money investing and aren't in the news, but Brandon is due to excelling at such a young age.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Investor101 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Doubling your money in the stock-market is not difficult; all that is required is insane luck and gigantic balls...or inside knowledge. Keeping your doubled money *is* difficult. (It took him a year? Pbsth. I doubled my money in ten minutes once going all-in on leveraged ETFs pre-open once. -Did I keep it? Noooo....) At any given moment, anyone can look like a genius playing roulette. Pax 01:15, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment: If the habitually-unsigning IP address 99.226.48.47 (as well as others at the article itself) and the SPA "Investor101" are the same person, I advise fessing up and striking out some commentary and duplicate voting right now, before someone decides a checkuser analysis is warranted on the appropriate sockpuppet noticeboards. Pax 01:21, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Nothing about Fleisher rises to the level of being truly notable. He is a run of the mill investor.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Running a business and investing at 17 sounds notable to me. I see he has been in The Telegraph (Biggest Newspaper in the UK), USA Today (3rd largest newspaper in the USA), and Metro (one of the biggest newspapers in Canada) and also being interviewed about himself on TV. 50.75.232.86 (talk) 18:21, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable and should be on Wikipedia IMO but should be written better. I think its suitable for wiki if it gets a major edit or rewrite. 65.124.181.96 (talk) 23:32, 16 February 2015 (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.