Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Maxwell


 * 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. I previously closed this as no-consensus, but Sockpuppet investigations/Maxwhr/Archive has established that socking adversely affected the result. Deletion is the appropriate option Stifle (talk) 14:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Harry Maxwell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I have no doubt that the programme that this individual appeared on, in and of itself, had/has a particular notability but I cannot see any compliance herein contained in this article with the requirements set out on WP:NOTABILITY. For Junior Apprentice specifically, not a single other contestant has had a descriptive biographical article yet created and there similarly appears to be a deal of self- and brand promotion which may flirt with the WP:PROMO guidelines possibly? Pigduck (talk) 19:33, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unneccessary article waste of space and not a notable person. Also as said no other young person on the young apprentice has a page.
 * Delete. I agree, Maxwell doesn't meet the notability guidelines.  Yinta n   20:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  21:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  21:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  21:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Moderate Keep, this one is a bit tricky in that his star is definitely on the rise and in a year from now I'll have no doubt that he's much more notable that what he is now. But if we're just looking at the here and now I'd say that the article should stay. There certainly seems to be a bit about him on a multitude of sites. (Solution55 (talk) 04:45, 4 May 2013 (UTC))
 * Delete or incubate. Not a notable subject at the moment. 1292simon (talk) 13:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete No more notable than any of the other Young Apprentice candidates who do not have their own articles. Tiller54 (talk) 20:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Don't you think we should have a look at his current activities and see then in say 6 months time what's happening. I thik we should hold off on any merge or deletion etc. I have a very strong feeling that if this article is deleted now it will be up and running in less than a year. By that time he would have had more appearances under his belt and no doubt his star would have risen. (Solution55 (talk) 09:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC))
 * Comment He was on The Apprentice two years ago, why would he suddenly become more notable in the next six months? Tiller54 (talk) 09:54, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Tiller54 have you actually looked at the other Young Apprentice candidates at all/ even read Maxwell's page? I think you will see he is much more notable apprenticelover (talk) 18:52, 11 May 2013 (GMT)


 * Redirect to Young Apprentice as a likely search term. J04n(talk page) 14:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep If we were to solely consider the Junior Apprentice process that Maxwell competed in 18 months ago, I could see your reasoning for deletion more. Although Maxwell did a global record for survival from any incarnation of The Apprentice, was caught-up in a well documented love-triangle and came under fire for his under-age partying; media attention no other competitor from the junior counterpart has received. However, since leaving the show, Maxwell has kept up a profile which none of the other candidates have and for this reason I think it's noteworthy. His business ventures and partnerships with LinkedIn and a Made in Chelsea star were reported on Mail Online six months ago, he has appeared as a recurring celebrity feature in an ITV2 series following his appearance, has been caught up in documented romances with two other reality stars and has come under fire for his partying at prestigious events like the BRITs. Furthermore, he has signed an exclusivity deal with Yahoo! and writes a weekly column giving his viewpoints. I think in terms of the show itself, I could understand why you may want to delete it, although he is definitely the stand-out in the bunch. However his activities post show and the interest shown by the British press and online outlets justifies the articles existence. Jessicaleuch12 (talk) 18:08, 11 May 2013 (GMT)
 * Keep Unless we are considering some great purge of any of the big names from The Apprentice having their own Wikipedia page? Whilst no other Junior Apprentice has their own page, Maxwell has greater references and a higher profile than some of the winners from the main series accolading an individual page, for example Simon Ambrose, Lee McQueen and Yasmina Siadatan. Maxwell is also a much more recent feature. apprenticelover (talk) 18:47, 11 May 2013 (GMT)
 * Keep Meets notability criteria, hence last page deletion request was disapproved. It's not a case of "No other Junior Apprentice candidates have a seperate page" - work as a presenter for Yahoo!, relationships with reality TV stars, business venture coverage from outlets like Mail Online (all in the last six months) meets the guidelines of "significant coverage" with "reliable" "sources" and when combined with the apprentice background means the page should stay maxwhr (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2013 (GMT)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxwhr (talk • contribs)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone  21:16, 11 May 2013 (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.