Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yoel Roth


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Yoel Roth

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

There is no significant coverage about the subject. Most coverage are passing mentions or short quotes. Most significant coverage is just a small part of the recent attention to layoffs at Twitter. MarioGom (talk) 22:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Internet,  and United States of America. MarioGom (talk) 22:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. No evidence of in-depth coverage in RS.4meter4 (talk) 23:15, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk, where I have added a mention of the subject, per WP:ATD-R and WP:CHEAP. I am in agreement with nom that the article proper should not be kept at this time, due to WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTLINKEDIN. While the article is not strictly in violation of WP:BLP1E, since the subject has been in the news at least once before, still he is not mentioned as a notable employee of the company, and he will likely remain a low-profile individual, per WP:BALL.  Stony Brook  babble 03:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks- I'm reasonably new so grateful for the advice.
 * Not sure how to flag just a general discussion There's a few I'm working on adding(sorry, busy week) including this which is entirley focused on him, and is a notable source(I think- no expert- they're a large significant media org but aren't english focused so there's not much use of them on english language wiki).
 * I made it because there's significant coverage in the...Less reputable sphere(NY post has mutliple articles, a handful of clickbait sites, lots of poor repute TV news and livestreamers, etc) and having a well documented page on his background/actions seems to have value.
 * Not sure how else to document notability of someone who's (nominally) in charge of one of the most contentious aspects of a social media site of this size. Adacable (talk) 16:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Welcome and thank you for your edits. We generally abstain here from creating articles for lower level company employees mentioned in the news, such as these.    See the links I posted in my comment above for more information.  Stony Brook  babble 23:15, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, I think this is slightly why I'm confused- He's reporting directly to the CEO, and their org chart puts him on the same levels as VPs/Directors. While I'm not 100% familiar with the corperate world, and I imagine it varies a lot, this doesn't appear to be a junior role? Or one which is similar to the ones linked, which are like, three levels lower on the org chart. Where does the cuttoff lie for a company on the size/influence of twitter, as a rule of thumb?
 * I certainly don't want to do the linkdin thing- But he is a figure who's consistently appearing in news articles(even prior to the musk aqquesition) and indeed has had a handful of articles written specifically about him. It seems valuable to have something which can exist outside of the hype cycle to provide a background to people reading those, but if that's not wikipedia that's fine. Adacable (talk) 10:26, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The NPR interview is focused on company policy only, not a word about why he would be considered a notable person in his own right, say outside of his cubicle. Same is true for the other reputable sources cited, which only mention him in this context. As you mentioned, LinkedIn is not considered a good enough source for this type of information. There are lots of corporate types doing their jobs out there who sometimes get their 15 minutes of fame. But Twitter, Jack Dorsey and Elon Musk get into the encyclopedia, while other officers and employees generally don't.  Stony Brook  babble 15:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete I am no longer convinced that Yoel Roth should redirect to the Twitter officer, since a different Yoel Roth could potentially get the article (although he has also been known as Joel Roth, not to be confused with Joel Roth). In addition to the above, mention of the subject in Acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk was already removed today by a random Wikipedian, so it is obvious that the subject was not deemed important enough by them to be mentioned even in a spinoff article, let alone in Twitter or in Twitter, Inc.; therefore, since neither of the Yoel Roths seem to be very high profile, if anything Yoel Roth might need to be a future dab page.  Stony Brook  babble 17:26, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The info about Roth's tweet was already in the article in another paragraph, without mentioning Roth because he's not particularly relevant/notable to the subject at hand. That's why I removed your added text, but I also moved your reference here. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:11, 10 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete Created out of WP:RECENTISM due to WP:BREAKING news, this bio fails WP:GNG and WP:BLP1E. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:52, 11 November 2022 (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.