Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandon Mendelson


 * 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   keep. It appears to me that, although Mendelson may not be notable as an author per se, he does pass the WP:GNG. Multiple sources have been put forth, in the article as well, covering the book, Mendelson's promotion of it and his use of social media. COI issues and promotional text have been cleaned up (and are not grounds for an AFD anyways). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:27, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Brandon Mendelson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable enough. Fails WP:AUTHOR. WP:COI problem. Created by blocked ad-only user Talk:Royale.heart. Related to sockpuppet problem being cleaned up. John Nagle (talk) 21:06, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note This is related to a problem discussed at Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard --John Nagle (talk) 21:11, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Setting aside COI and other issues, there is significant coverage of the subject in and by WP:RS sources. This article clearly rings the GNG bell. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:22, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:04, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. He's written one minor book. 7,000 copies sold, Amazon rank #367,664. He's promoted that book on every social medium he can reach, including Wikipedia. That's all he's done. The book doesn't reach the notability level needed for WP:BOOK, and the author doesn't reach the notability level for WP:AUTHOR. John Nagle (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete !vote by nominator struck as duplicative of nomination. postdlf (talk) 20:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * delete He is a minor author who specializes in self promotion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:59, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Lots of coverage in multiple reliable sources. The number of books sold (a few or a lot) is of little importance (eg. best-sellers are not automatically notable). Notability is determined by the sources. -- Green  C  23:56, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * A lot of the references aren't reliable sites. Some are sites anyone can edit, and others are just copy and pasted elsewhere. I'm looking through the ones that are reliable sources.  mentions this guy made money by sending in old cell phones to a company to recycle.  Not much coverage about him though.   has brief bit about him doing something online about Breast Cancer that got 21,000 people to click follow.  PBS did interview him, treating him as an expert on a subject.  Is this an actual show someone is paid to do, or just one of the things anyone can do, and give them freely, and they run it?  I see claims about writing in "CNN, Forbes, Mashable, The Huffington Post, the Eisner-nominated ComicsAlliance, and MTV’s O Music Awards".  I Googled for two of those so far, and yes, he published articles in them.  A lot of references in the article.  Which two really would count towards his notability?   D r e a m Focus  02:21, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep This and other reliable sources I've looked through convince me he passes the WP:GNG.  I have removed some of the bad references from the article.   D r e a m Focus  02:32, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * That article says he used to be in the top 100 on Twitter, back in 2009. But that was 5 years ago. Today, he's not anywhere close. He has 738K followers, and everyone in the top 100 on Twitter now has over 7 million. Looks like his notability may be over. John Nagle (talk) 19:14, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Notability is not temporarily.  D r e a m Focus  19:44, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. The nominator posted a question about this AFD at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) postdlf (talk) 20:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Either the author or his book is notable from going by sufficient sources covering the ideas behind book, but I would think the author is the better standalone here since his career started before the book. As others have noted, notability is not temporary so as long as he was previously noted as a top Twitter account, that doesn't change even if he now lags behind others. --M ASEM (t) 04:18, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as clearly a PR effort. The article has "referenciness" but the references all seem to me to be trivial or press releases or what have you. Guy (Help!) 18:22, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment'Hi there. I'm the article subject. I will abide by your wishes and whatever decision you choose to make. This page was not paid for, and I hope I may point you to: http://bjmendelson.com/b-j-mendelson-in-the-press/ as a list of all media appearances I've made back to 2005 including CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, Yahoo! News, WBEZ (a major NPR affiliate), TechCrunch, and the CBC. Thank you :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandonmendelsonofficial (talk • contribs) 19:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you Mr. Mendelson for your comment. You are welcome to participate in this AfD discussion, however if you are new to Wikipedia and have not read WP:COI I would encourage you to take a look at it. Also please refrain from posting personal information on here. There is some tolerance for an email address posted on a user's page, but it is strongly discouraged elsewhere. And posting a personal phone number anywhere on the internet is a common sense no no. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:14, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you Ad Orientem. I don't have too much else to add here other than I am appreciative of everyone's time in looking into this. I am familiar with the COI rules but I'm not sure what else I can say beyond that I haven't paid anyone to make a page for me. I was approached by the editor after they saw a video of me on CNN. I agree the page was poorly constructed, but am hopeful that the editors here and in the larger community will make it adhere better to the page guidelines. The only thing I'd like to say is that there seems to be a larger issue of "Notable" vs. "Not notable enough". It would seem I am notable as per the guidelines as they currently exist, and there's just one or two editor who thinks I'm "not notable enough" through a subjective interpretation of the current guidelines. This seems like a larger Wikipedia policy issue worthy of discussion, but I think my page is probably an inappropriate place for that to happen. I am a Wikipedia fan, I know people on the board, and I strongly support the removal of sockpuppets and paid for pages, so I am not mad or annoyed about this whole thing. I understand why it's happening, and I hope that these comments I've made assist in the group rendering a decision. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandonmendelsonofficial (talk • contribs) 16:12, 19 March 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 09:51, 22 March 2014 (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.