Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brett King (2nd nomination)


 * 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. As is customary, "votes" from unregistered and newly-registered users have been discounted. Stifle (talk) 08:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Brett King
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

As mentioned in the talk page. This page reads like an autobiography/advert. It was created and maintained by User:Brett k, thus autobiographical. This page has been tagged once before and User:Secret, who is an administrator, saw fit make the page a redirect to the company page. User:Brett k undid this move. A quick google search finds many other Brett King's listed but I can't find this guy. If this guy is deemed not notable, I suppose the image should be deleted as well. RobDe68 (talk) 17:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep It's a mess, and undoubtedly an autobio, but that huge list of media exposure ELs seems to indicate come notability. (Some are passing references, but some have detail.) JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 18:35, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep 2: I have worked with Brett King and his understanding of the customer experience in a banking environment really is unique and as an author of an upcoming book BANK 2.0 see this profile being no different to other authors such as Jakob Nielsen or Jesse James Garret who are known for their user experience work in the web development community. BenMay75 10:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC) — BenMay75 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep 3: Looks OK and could use some updating by a WIKI Master to make the presentation even better. Other than that, King is an incredibly notable figure.  Globalprofessor  —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- Pete.Hurd (talk) 19:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Delete. So far as I can tell, this guy fails WP:PROF, so his notability would have to come from elsewhere.  The media quotes academics; being consulted by the media for news stories does not make one more notable than your average professor.  None of the stories on the page are about King.  Of the two people that BenMay75 mentions, I can only find a Wikipedia article on the first; in any case, the fact that other stuff exists doesn't establish notability.  RJC Talk Contribs 20:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)  Update:  Changed vote to delete, given that no one has pointed to independent news coverage that establishes notablity, as opposed to stories which utilize him as a source.  RJC Talk Contribs 00:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Response from Brett King Please allow me to defend this entry. I am a judge on two distinguished international awards panels, published commercially and academically in more than 40 countries and listed as faculty on 4 Universities currently. I'm happy to supply journal and academic papers to anyone who is interested. However, the key issue here is whether this entry is deemed one of a notable or noteworthy person for WP:BIO. I suggest you try a search on Google for "Brett King" Wealth Management, "Brett King" Dubai, "Brett King" Hong Kong or similar where 90% of the return results on the first few pages support the entry. Please also feel free to check with William Byrnes, Assoc Dean Thomas Jefferson School of Law (San Diego), Dr. K. K. Lam at City University, or Dr. Richard Petty, Assoc Dean, Macquarie Graduate School of Management for my academic credentials if you have any concerns on the WP:PROF. Brett King is a fairly common name. I do not believe I should be penalized for holding a name that other notable people also hold.
 * delete the external links contain a substantial degree of puffery, three of the links are broken, two of them don't include a mention of the biography subject by name. With very few (one?) exception, the rest of the external links mention the subject by name just once, usually just to source a quip. IMHO, none of these amount to the extensive coverage of Brett King as a subject in reliable secondary sources.  For example the first three all link to strikingly similar news reports (minimally reprocessed press release?) in which the identical, or virtually identical, paragraph contains Brett Kings name (re)printed in www.arabianbusiness.com, www.khaleejtimes.com, and www.pr-usa.net.  Googling "Brett King" primarily returns hits for the actor and Saturday Night Live producer, or psychologist.  Google scholar primariily turns up Brett A. King.  Vanity and COI puffery move me from "weak delete" to "delete".  If WP:RS sources are produced to demonstrate that he passes either WP:BIO or WP:PROF, I'll change my opinion, but I've seen none on the searching I've done. Pete.Hurd (talk) 20:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Response from Brett King Google Scholar entries under Brett A. King are my own. My middle name is Andrew. I do not use it commercially, only in my academic references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brett k (talk • contribs) 21:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Brett A. King, as in author of "Ultra-fast excited state dynamics in green fluorescent protein: multiple states and proton transfer" PNAS, cited 222 times, and "Crystal Structure and Photodynamic Behavior of the Blue Emission Variant Y66H/Y145F of Green Fluorescent Protein" cited 68 times?, "Excited State Energy Transfer Pathways in Photosynthetic Reaction Centers. 1. Structural Symmetry Effects", "Electronic Structure of the Chromophore in Green Fluorescent Protein (GFP)" & "Spatially localized generation of nucleotide sequence-specific DNA damage" Because that seems to be the only Brett A. King my Google Scholar searches turn up. Pete.Hurd (talk) 22:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Pete Hurd. --Crusio (talk) 20:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Financial Lawyer. --Financiallawyer  If Asia, Middle East, Africa, Australia, UK, and India knows who he is, that's good enough for me.  3/5ths or more of the English speaking world is a strong majority.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.252.125.151 (talk) 23:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC) Note that 24.252.125.151's "per Financial Lawyer" !vote was added before Financiallawyer's comment, obvious sockpuppetry Pete.Hurd (talk) 23:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep User:Financiallawyer|Financiallawyer]]  If Asia, Middle East, Africa, Australia, UK, and India knows who he is, that's good enough for me.  3/5ths or more of the English speaking world is a strong majority.
 * Keep --Harryllufrio (talk) 01:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)- I disagree with considering to remove this article. Brett King is clearly an achiever and his achievements and associates should be included within this article. I have worked alongside Brett in the past and can vouch that he brings a lot of knowledge and value to the table when it comes to the user experience and online strategy for financial institutions and the travel industry. He is a genuine article. If anyone is seriously considering removing this article then they should also consider removing Bill Gates and Steve Jobs aswell. — Harryllufrio (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are in no danger of being deleted because they meet the criterion of WP:N, people have written about them, a lot. That's the problem with this biography, no one independent of him seems to have written about him in a reliable source.  If you google up Bill Gates and Steve Jobs you get information on them, if you google up Brett King... well, I suppose you might find this page... Pete.Hurd (talk) 03:55, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Keep - I agree with JeremyMcKraken, While some of the language used could be edited to create a less autobio feel, the criteria for Bio's (as I read them) have been met. WP:BIO - "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." WP:N - "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable" Of all the links I checked, they were all referencing Brett King as a presenter, panel expert, judge etc to what appear to be fairly globally recognized arenas and events. The articles and sources referring to him are secondary sources and reference him as a reliable source. Some removal of similar news articles could be considered if this is deemed an issue. Brett has noted the simplicity of finding large resources of information with slightly refined Google parameters, again, resulting in a long list of secondary sources and notability. As his brother I can verify both the order of events that occured and also rebutt the inference of WP:SSP as this would be against the integrity and principals of his character. Troyk26 (talk) 06:59, 10 September 2008 (UTC) troyk26
 * added the "not a ballot" template due to recent rash of SPAs. I'll go and file an WP:SSP with the idea that Globalprofessor, Brett k, BenMay75, Financiallawyer, and Harryllufrio are the same person.  IIRC, such actions are warranted only if the apparent sockpuppetry influences the outcome, so we'll see how this closes first before considering bothering the WP:RCU crowd. Pete.Hurd (talk) 03:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * — troyk26 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * delete only claim to notability seems to be helped found an organization. At best that gets this merged into the organization under history.--Buridan (talk) 11:22, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * comment Obviously I think that this article should be deleted since I made the nomination. I just wanted to add that User:Brett K has admitted to being Brett King in this edit confirming the suspicion that this article is indeed autobiographical in nature. I believe that would make this a case of conflict of interest. I hope those that make the final decision also make note of the multiple SPAs that seemed to have created an account just to come to the defense of keeping the article. RobDe68 (talk) 01:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I forgot, I also wanted to bring to light the similarities between the article and this Linked-In public profile, which appears to be an E-business card. RobDe68 (talk) 01:24, 11 September 2008 (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.