Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Barnett


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 00:38, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Tyler Barnett

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Self-promotional article with no evidence of notability. Most of the references don't give substantial coverage, and some of them are in business promotion sites or for other reasons doubtfully independent and/or reliable. (Note: PROD was contested by IP with no edits on any other subject but Tyler Barnett.) JamesBWatson (talk) 17:13, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Keep This should be kept because  In addition subject was selected by the Los Angeles Business Journal, a very reputable secondary source as one of the top 20 entrepreneurs in their 20's, again with significant coverage. (citation 5) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tylerbarnett (talk • contribs) 19:39, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. He's been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources per WP:GNG. Pburka (talk) 20:35, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The subject's business is getting people's names in print.  Of course he knows how to get his own in print a few times in quite trivial ways.  In addition, most of these are quotes and getting quoted doesn't count for notability because that makes it a primary source.  Wikipedia is not a webhost for self-promotion and autobiographies.  Msnicki (talk) 23:30, 26 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I went through the list of references on the page and I'd like to note that only one of the sources seems to be reliable. One is hidden behind a paywall (the LA Business Journal) and the other two are brief mentions where Barnett is only quoted. That he was a finalist in BusinessWeek's 25 young entrepreneurs is good, but it seems that since then not much has really been written on him. A search did not bring anything up that could be considered a reliable source. There was a lot of company-created sites, but nothing that would be considered a reliable source. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 02:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Being unavailable to read online without payment doesn't make a source "hidden" or unreliable. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:14, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, but it does make it difficult to verify its content, and if there is no significant coverage elsewhere in reliable sources, the existence of just one source which we can't see, and which may or may not contain significant coverage is not convincing evidence of notability. The fact that several other sources cited by the same editor did no more than briefly quote the person does not give one confidence. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. I think we may have fixated too much on RS above, and not enough on notability. Assuming everything is completely reliably sourced, you are left with  a 28 year old businessman who appeared on a reality TV show and has been recognised (amongst a broad swathe of other people) as a young entrepeneur who may one day achieve something.  And that doesn't really cut it. --Legis (talk - contribs) 21:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Reliable sources and notability are tightly and inexorably connected. Our standard for notability is significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Pburka (talk) 23:19, 29 December 2011 (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.