Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W. Jeffrey Brown


 * 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. The one "keep" does not cite or discuss reliable sources establishing notability.  Sandstein  12:39, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

W. Jeffrey Brown

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

DeProd on the basis that he is known for a recent court decision. However, that is not sufficient for notability per WP:BLP1E. Other than that, seems to be a run-of-the-mill businessman, with the brief, shallow, local coverage you would expect from that. Hugsyrup (talk) 08:39, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 08:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 08:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep While the article certainly needs expansion (sorry I've been dealing with student finals!) the subject is known and notable for more than just the Fourth Estate v. Wall-Street court decision. Subject is the founder of the first journalism public benefit coop in the USA, has notability for AP v AHN.  Most importantly, media and journalism industry leaders hold special notability for democracy transparency purposes.   The Columbian Journalism Librarian (talk) 13:09, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Notability is not fame nor importance. Uncle G (talk) 17:19, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:30, 14 June 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * To support a Wikipedia biography written in the correct way, there has to be people who have actually researched and published documentation of this person's life and works. The fact that the article at hand sources all other information about the subject, apart from court cases and an appointment, to the subject's own autobiography on LinkedIn and Twitter, is telling.  Searching, I find no independent sources documenting this person's life and work in depth, merely lots of other autobiographies.  It is not possible to write a Wikipedia biography of this person in compliance with Wikipedia's content policies.  The Primary Notability Criterion is not satisfied, for lack of multiple, or indeed any, independent in-depth good sources. Uncle G (talk) 17:19, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, Confusing article, reads like a resume with little indication of his notability. There is no coverage from credible sources, and the references are simply routine coverage and PR release of respective institutions plus some social media profiles. Viztor (talk) 09:41, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Also note that an Organization v. Organization case do not automatically grant persons of respective organizations notability. Viztor (talk) 09:44, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:19, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:00, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:00, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:00, 22 June 2019 (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.