Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhys Lawrey


 * 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. MER-C 12:58, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Rhys Lawrey

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails the criteria of Notability (people). This is an autobiography (2mororider is Lawrey's handle, website URL, etc) that is sourced entirely to press releases by Lawrey's sponsor, Triumph, or his own website, or press releases by his high school, or his partner charity. None of the sources meet Wikipedia's standards for independence. No sources verify that Lawrey's record attempt was successful. No sources verify that any such Guinness categories, "Youngest Person to Circumnavigate the World by Motorcycle" and "Most Consecutive Capital Cities Visited by Motorcycle" even exist.The Daily Mirror tabloid and Cambridge News Local World website citations are not credible. the ZA Bikers blog post is a copy-paste of Triumph's press release.Finally, the ride for which all this is about is a professionally organized tour by Globebusters tour company owned by Lawrey's parents. Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. Well, whatever you want to call this, it did seem to get some international media attention. For example, this bylined (short) article from Maori Television, or this interview with a Polish motorcycling website (I'm not 100% sold on reliability there, but it does have a declared editorial staff, so...). On the other hand, this interview with maybe-reliable Brake Magazine all but admits that these aren't "real" records, just things Lawrey made up (to his credit, that is pretty much how Guinness records work in the post-Norris McWhirter era). BLP1E definitely doesn't apply; as a "brand ambassador" for Triumph (plus the entire promotional nature of this event), he's certainly not a low-profile individual. But on the other hand, there's a question of how much of the media coverage exists solely because this is a giant international promotional stunt, paid for by his father's company and Triumph. And then, on the gripping hand, whether there was sufficient media attention for him to be notable even if that's exactly what this all is. I'm not sure I know which side of that line I stand on, although the article as it currently stands is clearly an exercise in self-promotion and would need aggressive culling and rewording should it be retained. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 20:29, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Changed to delete. Upon further consideration, taking a stand to delete here. Because this is a one-event biography, and that single event was so directly promotional in nature, I think there's a very real question about whether small-market coverage of the event is "independent" in the traditional sense. That is to say, would Maori Television or Ścigacz or Brake Magazine have covered Lawrey and his global motorcycle tour without the promotional engine behind it working to ensure that people wrote about it where he went? That answer is clearly no, they would not have. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:28, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete and salt per nom. Wikipedia is not an outlet for press manipulation - David Gerard (talk) 21:07, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as this is what he should place at his Facebook, not here, as none of it comes close at all for an acceptable article, nor should it be since everything listed is trivial. SwisterTwister   talk  22:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - I am inclined to agree with Squeamish Ossifrage that this is essentially BLP1E. Rlendog (talk) 22:45, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete with a dose of salt. This is clearly an attempt to misuse Wikipedia as a platform for self-promotional PR, in defiance of WP:NOTADVERT. Local media can be easily suckered by a press release claiming a distinction (such as being in the Guinness Book of World Records) that isn't actually true, so if nobody can actually locate verification that his name is in Guinness for holding the record in a recognized Guinness record category, the fact that a couple of media sources have uncritically repeated that claim is not enough. Bearcat (talk) 17:28, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * And that's essentially impossible now. Guinness isn't what it used to be (as you can tell by looking at what current print editions look like). Records of the type Lawrey is claiming are typically published in neither their print edition nor their website. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * In Lawrey's defense, what he's doing is not much different from all the names in the recent 20-40 years on List of long-distance motorcycle riders. The list began with the names of riders who had done pioneering rides of extraordinary difficultly. Later it became well-blazed routes being followed on bikes which are specially engineered for the express purpose. Even riders followed by a support crew in a truck. It's either somebody trying to get other people to pay for their vacation, or seeking fame for the sake of fame, or selling books, videos, etc. People like Emilio Scotto have simply been more expert at getting reputable media outlets to publish long features containing facts and claims whose sole source is Emilio Scotto. There's little aggressive fact-checking in the media because nobody cares all that much. Notable, yet not notable?I've been trying to figure out how you can define list criteria that run on a curve: early feats meet criteria that become progressively stricter as the years go forward. But for now we just go by WP:GNG for all. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:55, 30 September 2016 (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.