Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darren Entwistle


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   03:38, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Darren Entwistle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Poorly referenced WP:BLP of a businessman, which is written far more like a résumé than an encyclopedia article. Of the 31 references here, 17 are dead links, 9 are primary sources that cannot support notability at all, two are YouTube videos that cannot support notability at all, and one is a routine inclusion in a business directory. There's literally just one reference here (MobileSyrup, #28) that's both live and even a maybe on the reliable source scale — and it's verifying a tangential fact about his company while completely failing to mention his name at all, so it counts in no way as coverage of him. And on substance, what we have here is a brief PR-toned bioblurb about him, followed by a bunch of bullet-pointed résumé sections — which is not what a Wikipedia article is supposed to look like even if the referencing for it were adequate. No prejudice against recreation in the future if it can be written and referenced properly, but what we have here right now is a clear candidate for the blow it up and start over treatment. Bearcat (talk) 14:55, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:00, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:27, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk |c|em ) 12:21, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - CEO (since 2000) of S&P-TSX component with market-cap of 26.5 billion dollars. As per BUSINESSPERSONOUTCOME CEOs of fortune-500 (US) or FTSE-100 (UK) are generally deemed significant - the entry threshold to these is around 4 billion dollars market cap. Telus would be a fortune-500 company if it was US based. In addition there are around 1,000 google-news hits. The article might need to be re-written - but this is a significant business figure.Icewhiz (talk) 12:51, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 08:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per nuke & repave. Reads like a promotional CV, with an endless list of minor awards, including from Telus. If the subject is indeed notable (of which I'm not yet convinced -- sourcing is pretty thin), then I'm sure a non-COI editor would come along and create an NPOV article. K.e.coffman (talk) 22:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:19, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Definetly notable, article is not very encylcopedic. L3X1 (distant write)  02:40, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Google shows plenty of coverage in a variety of sources. CEO of large corporation with coverage in RS to establish notability. I don't really find the article that bad, except for the last two sections on recognition which can just be deleted. The remainder is salvageable.  MB 02:55, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The subject meets GNG yet clearly the article requires extensive rebuilding. I completely understand the wish to nuke and repave, but I also think by saying it should be remade if even at the AfD we're acknowledging that it's an article that meets standards. In that case it should just be rewritten. S EMMENDINGER  ( talk ) 18:34, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment -- could the "Keep" voters present some sources (two or three strongest one) to help evaluate notability of this subject. Stating that "sources exist" is generally not a sufficient argument at AfD. thank you. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:22, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Here are some., , , , . Here are some. I see coverage over at least several year in mainstream places. MB 00:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * (EC) Glad to: 1, 2. quoted many times as CEO, 3, 4 mentioned as CEO, 5, and 6. L3X1  (distant write)  00:45, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll not he is not pushing PR on himself on the one hand, and on the other hand - there's lots of coverage of him due to routine TELUS stuff - which makes finding the non-routine more difficult. However, the following are of interest: - very in-depth piece on him personally from 2005.  - coverage of him specifically when he retook CEO post in 2015. Rankings such as:  .Icewhiz (talk) 06:15, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Also this one - - which is very much in-depth on him personally + entire career (added as citation in article).Icewhiz (talk) 07:32, 27 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Reluctant keep per sources presented. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:20, 28 April 2017 (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.