Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Britt (2nd nomination)

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:00, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Bill Britt

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Bill Britt
• Articles for deletion/Bill Britt (2nd nomination)
• Articles for deletion/Bill Britt 2

Bill Britt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

notability seems questionable and content either trivial or negative. Deleted twice before in 2006 and undeleted [1] in 2007. Rd232 ^talk 00:59, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

delete Almost entirely self-published difficult to verify primary sources or non-RS. The argument behind undeletion was based on a variety of sources being provided, but examination shows virtually none of them pass RS anyway --Insider201283 (talk) 01:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete - personality is not notable outside of the context of Amway. A google search has a lot of hits - and pretty much all of them are unable to be used as reliable source. Shot info (talk) 01:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - I've been searching for weeks for enough information to make any sort of article out of this. I've come to the conclusion that he's a good salesperson, who has pleased some and annoyed some people. He's attracted exactly that amount of coverage—nothing of significance beyond self-published sources on the man. Seems to have far too little independent sources writing about him for an acceptable article. - Peripitus (Talk) 02:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete – I don't think this would fall under G4 as the last AFD was more than two years ago and is likely different. Anyways, I cannot find any reliable sources independent of Amway to indicate notability. MuZemike 03:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• Link to previous DRV. I went through deletion review, and at that time the article was allowed to be created. The link is here. --Knverma (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Knervma, as above, hardly any of sources in that link are WP:RS or WP:V so I'm not sure why the recreate went through. Do you have any better sources? I'm sure Britt was likely covered in some of the many third party books on Amway, which are WP:RS and WP:V. --Insider201283 (talk) 12:43, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete That's hardly a clear DRV, I'm surprised it was recreated, though I'm presuming it was on the strength of the sources. He has one line in Forbes, apparently one line in Compasionate Capitalism, a brief reference in Triangle Business Journal article about the fraud, three lines in the MSNMC article, none of which could be called 'substantial' coverage. IBOAI is a trade organsitation so unlikely to be independent, 14 of the 21 sources are self-published. I think that covers the WP:RS criteria. --GedUK  13:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per above.--Scott Mac (Doc) 14:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Britt is notable in a political and economic sense. 76.70.118.218 (talk) 14:18, 9 March 2009 (UTC) — 76.70.118.218 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Delete per above. THF (talk) 14:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• weak delete Per Ged UK's analysis. Looks to me like he's not quite passing notability. More sources might change my mind but right now I'm not seeing it. JoshuaZ (talk) 20:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 10 March 2009 (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.