Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Fox (author)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. This article still needs work to make it less promotional, though. Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Scott Fox (author)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Appears to be overly promotional and shows no sign of meeting WP:GNG due to lack of RS. — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 03:15, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, Entertainment, Finance, Law, Internet, California, Michigan,  and New York.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  04:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:31, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Vortex - We got a notice that this page was flagged for deletion. Great timing as I have been meaning to hopefully update it. The info is old and not entirely accurate as it was written by fans of my books years ago. Can u share any guidance on how we can improve its "notability" to meet Wikipedia standards? Also what is "RS"? You're probably a volunteer so thanks for all the work you do for the Wikipedia community. Scott Nelsonave21 (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, Scott. Please read this link WP:GNG for the general standards to meet "notability". On Wikipedia, RS stands for "reliable sources". For authors, this commonly includes reviews of your books. None of the sources cited on the article are WP:RS because they are just raw interviews of you, only mention you briefly (see WP:GNG for more info) or are written by Forbes contributors (see this link WP:FORBES for info on deciding what Forbes articles count as RS).
 * Also, yes, like many editors on Wikipedia, I am a volunteer and edit as a hobby :) — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Mention: @Nelsonave21 — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 06:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Additionally, I'm concerned about you saying "We got a notice that this page was flagged for deletion." Just a head's up if you got an email about this, please be aware that scammers have targeted people whose articles have been deleted or flagged for deletion before (WP:SCAM), offering to restore it or something similar. Most, if not all, of these offers are fradulent. — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 09:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Vortex: thank you for this detailed reply. This is super helpful. We will work on it. What is the best way to submit or update? Is there a timeline? Thanks again, including for the accurate warning about the (likely scammy) deletion email we received. Nelsonave21 (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Nelsonave21: Please see WP:AFD, particularly this line: If you wish for an article to be kept, you can directly improve the article to address the reasons for deletion given in the nomination. You can search [for] reliable sources so that the article meets notability guidelines. AfD discussion like this one are kept open for at least seven days before a decision is made (multiple editors have to give their opinions first before a decision about the consensus can be made, so this discussion will probably go on for longer). In your case, editing the article yourself would be COI editing, which is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. However, you can find examples of reliable sources about you or your books and post it here, on this AfD, to prove the article meets WP:GNG. This would prevent deletion. Again, most RS for authors takes the form of book reviews in newspapers, magazines, or periodicals.  If this AfD is closed with consensus to delete the article, the article can be recreated if and only if it satisfies WP:GNG. In this case, I recommend the AfC process, which involves writing a draft article and submitting it for review. — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 06:19, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I've not reviewed the article yet, but while it is normal for an AFD discussion to be closed within a week or a month, don't worry too much about that, you can usually get an admin to restore the contents as a draft or by email if you'd like to work on it. "Deletion" is not generally irreversible. Alpha3031 (t • c) 04:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: The USA Today won't open, the rest are non-RS per Cite Highlighter. Unfortunately, I don't see book reviews, nor much of anything for this person. No notability found, does not pass AUTHOR. Oaktree b (talk) 19:15, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Oaktree, Alpha3031, Vortex3427 and other editors - thanks very much for the followup on this.
 * We have gathered 100+ links referring to my work supporting startup entrepreneurs over the years, including dozens of book reviews, speaking appearances, and podcasts. We will narrow those down to the more significant ones.
 * What's the best way to share those links? I know you are volunteers and don't want to burden you, so how can we help best? (Happy to draft a rewrite of the current page for your review but not sure that's allowed.)
 * Also, many of the bigger name book reviews were from my first book back in 2006-8. It was a pioneering work in the development of Web 2.0 entrepreneurship. We have jpgs and some PDFs of those articles from outlets like the Boston Globe, Philadelphia Inquirer, Toronto Globe & Mail, Orange County Register etc. but unfortunately the old URLs are mostly 404 by now. How best to share those?
 * Similarly - my books have been translated into many languages around the world. That seems to show they are "notable" also in other languages. We found links to some of those (Turkish, Polish, Vietnamese) but other editions (like Russian and Japanese) are not discoverable via English search engines. We do have screen shots of the cover art, though. Can we share those, too?
 * Thanks for your help learning how Wikipedia works. I have donated repeatedly in the past but never gotten into the nuts & bolts of it like this.
 * Scott
 * p.s. I'm currently working on 2 new books to help startup founders, esp under-represented female, minority, and non-US entrepreneurs. Thank you all for your time. Hopefully we can keep my page alive so its available during those book launches next year. Nelsonave21 (talk) 20:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Nelsonave21: Yes, please share the PDFs here. — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 00:36, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, will do. How do we share PDFs here, though? There's no attachments tool in the toolbar.
 * Thanks. Nelsonave21 (talk) 06:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Nelsonave21: You'd have to upload it on another website and share the links here. — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 08:18, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Do we have any editors willing to look through some of these references brought up in this discussion? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment After scouring the internet for any possible sources, I've found two book reviews and one article that I believe would count towards notability. I've also found four more book reviews, but I'm unsure if the coverage is significant enough to count. Leaving them here for a more experienced editor to assess. — V ORTEX  3427 (Talk!) 09:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi again - thanks for your guidance here. And for finding those additional sources. You found coverage I've never seen before!
 * Below is a list of URLs that are still active online that include some of the coverage of my books and work.
 * We have also put up a Google Drive folder here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1j0KUxFYUl4A5qAo3-sKwzr-Z4MBIBIZI?usp=sharing That contains a couple of dozen more press clippings, major market book reviews, foreign book covers, etc. for publicity that has since fallen offline.
 * If these are helpful, we easily have a lot more from my almost 20 years of serving entrepreneurs if you'd like to see it.
 * Hopefully that's the right idea for sources.
 * Please LMK how we can help if we can? It looks like a fair bit of work to parse through those and assign them properly into an article, etc. The article needs updating anyway and we'd be happy to assist.
 * Thanks again very much for your work here.
 * Scott
 * https://antrepreneur.uci.edu/2023/08/07/uci-antrepreneur-center-joins-forces-with-the-oc-startup-council-to-empower-student-entrepreneurs/
 * https://www.engine.is/news/startupseverywhere-orange-county-calif
 * https://www.nyjournalofbooks.com/book-review/click-millionaires-work-less-live-more-internet-business-you-love
 * https://alliancesocal.org/news/2024/03/01/preparing-founders-for-success-and-connections-at-happy-hour-in-irvine/
 * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YO6JdpN17P8
 * https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericwagner/2012/09/04/click-millionaires-7-secrets-to-less-work-and-more-life/
 * https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/13132762-click-millionaires
 * https://www.eofire.com/podcast/scott-fox-of-click-millionaires-interview-with-john-lee-dumas-of-entrepreneur-on-fire-2/
 * https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/58917442-e-riches-2-0
 * https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/108552513-internet-zenginleri
 * https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/44557823-click-millionaires-czyli-internetowi-milionerzy-e-biznes-na-twoich-zasad
 * https://www.beckman-foundation.org/latest-news/irvine-tech-week/
 * https://www.revolv3.com/resources/what-makes-orange-county-the-hottest-hub-for-startups-today
 * https://www.socalentrepreneurship.org/scce-24
 * https://www.operatepod.com/e/scott-fox-orange-county-startup-council/
 * https://www.cakeequity.com/podcasts/how-to-raise-first-rounds-scott-fox
 * https://startupgamechanger.org/speakers/scott-fox/ Nelsonave21 (talk) 06:11, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Article as is is too promotional but the book reviews presented by Vortex look good. He passes WP:NAUTHOR, his works themselves appear to have been sufficiently reviewed enough for notability. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
 * There are also additional reviews of his work on Newspapers.com. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:00, 15 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep. Satisfies GNG and AUTHOR. He has received significant coverage in independent reliable sources, including multiple periodical book reviews. James500 (talk) 17:28, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: As others have noted above, the subject has received enough significant coverage in reliable secondary sources to satisfy WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR.Sal2100 (talk) 15:01, 20 June 2024 (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.