Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joey Rubino


 * 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. Jayjg (talk) 20:59, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Joey Rubino

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

personal fitness trainer, unclear notability Melaen (talk) 12:35, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Ridiculous vanity article, with Twitter comments used as references. Qalana (talk) 20:45, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As the article's creator, I'd like to mention I've learned much both while preparing this (first) article, and since it's been listed for deletion review. A long time Wikipedia reader, had no idea the sheer volume of work editors have at this site. Impressed and looking forward to learning enough to help. As to this article, will rework and add additional sources to address the unclear notability.  Thank you Kmscli (talk) 13:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Added new article from national magazine as source and corrected some citation formatting errors. Thank you. Kmscli (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep newspaper/magazine references are adequate secondary source material to meet WP:BIO basic criteria AlgebraT (talk) 02:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep additional periodical sources successfully establish notability Infinitely Humble (talk) 19:42, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't see anything there that convinces me. Also, promotional in places - "Rubino's Workout Videos and tips can be found on the site under their 'Shorts' section ". Peridon (talk) 22:05, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm sorry, again, looking to learn, the videos are not for sale, so it did not occur to me that it would be considered promotional. That reference can certainly be removed. No promotional nature intended. Kmscli (talk) 22:34, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable. All but two of the 20 references provided are self-referential. The only claim of notability comes via footnotes listing Seventeen Magazine and the New York Times, but no link to an article is provided, and I was unable to find the supposed article in searching at the two publications. Google search finds only his website, social media sites, and a blog or two. Google News search finds nothing at all. --MelanieN (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I want to be the very first to extend a welcome to the three new accounts that have been established  .  Regarding the latter two, I'm glad that you were able to find the AfD Forum so quickly, and I appreciate all of your contributions to the discussions... Mandsford 01:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Mandsford, thank you very much for the welcome. While looking at the afd process, I have seen quite a few non-welcoming comments to new people, which, while not directed at me were somewhat off putting, so your welcome is very appreciated. MelanieN- I'm sorry the seventeen article is not yet online, it is new. The New York Times should certainly be online, but I only have the hard copy. Thank you for checking.Kmscli (talk) 04:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - the citations in the article seem to almost entirely promotional, and I couldn't find anything in google news. PhilKnight (talk) 14:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Most of the sources presented are from Twitter, and I could not find any more coverage on a Google News archives search. Minimal notability, at best, but I'm not seeing it here. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  16:16, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Article is a advertisement. Sources are first party and unreliable. A google search does not find any reputable third party sources. -- Alpha Quadrant   talk    20:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Per lack of sources and the fact that I passionately hate twitter and see any attempt to use it as a source as an issue affecting the very credibility of the project as a whole. (Remove all the Twitter and I still say delete though.) Sven Manguard  Talk  20:56, 11 October 2010 (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.