Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael J Coudrey (2nd nomination)
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}. |
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Michael J Coudrey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Recreation of an article that was previously deleted for failing WP:SIGCOV. Does not appear to have any new substantial sources from the first version of the article. Same issues apply. Also, editors should be aware that the first AFD had issues related to WP:MEATPUPPETRY and/or WP:SOCKPUPPETRY (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JalenPhotos2) and that this same account re-created the article. As such, administrators may need to carefully monitor the progress of this AFD. As always, any close of this AFD should be based on the strength of the arguments rather than a mere vote count per WP:NOTAVOTE. 4meter4 (talk) 22:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Comment. I am copy pasting my detailed source analysis from the first AFD, as many of the sources are identical. I will add any new sources from this current version of the Coudrey article to this list in the next couple hours.4meter4 (talk) 23:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
| Source | Description | Main Subject? | Significant Coverage? | Policy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rosenberg, Matthew; Corasaniti, Nick (2019-11-10). "Close Election in Kentucky Was Ripe for Twitter, and an Omen for 2020". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Article about a close election in Kentucky; Coudrey is mentioned briefly | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| Tenbarge, Kat. "A QAnon conspiracy theory about Oprah Winfrey went so viral that it provoked her to respond, showing the scope of coronavirus misinformation". Insider. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Article about a QAnon conspiracy theory about Oprah Winfrey; Coudrey is quoted briefly | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| Re, Gregg (2020-05-26). "Twitter puts warning label on a Trump tweet on mail-in ballots, despite experts backing up Trump's concerns". Fox News. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Article about Twitter and Trump; Coudrey is quoted briefly | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| Palmer, Ewan (2020-08-28). "Why Kyle Rittenhouse, filmed fleeing armed attackers, was charged with murder". Newsweek. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Article about prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse; Coudrey is quoted briefly | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| "How a chance Twitter thread launched Trump's favorite coronavirus drug". POLITICO. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Article about Trump, hydroxychloroquine, and the Covid pandemic; Coudrey is quoted briefly | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| "Dr. Laura Coudrey MD". US News. Retrieved June 17, 2021. | Profile of Coudrey's mother; paid for section and therefore not independent; no mention of subject | No | No | WP:SOURCE/ WP:SIGCOV |
| "Entrepreneur Michael Coudrey Discusses Business-Minded Childhood, Present Activities". CC Discovery. 2019-12-15. Retrieved 2021-06-18. | Interview of Courdrey by Canyon Country Discovery Center; lacks independence and is too closely connected to the subject to count towards RS | Yes | No | WP:SOURCE/ WP:SIGCOV |
| "Presenting the Class of 2011". Kings Park, NY Patch. 2011-06-23. Retrieved 2019-12-12. | List of Kings Park High School graduates; verifies he graduated but is just one name among many | No | No | WP:SIGCOV |
| "Virus consipracy-theory video shows challenges for big tech". AP NEWS. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Article on the 26-minute documentary-style video dubbed “Plandemic,”; Coudrey is briefly quoted | No | No | WP:SIGCOV |
| Dwilson, Stephanie Dube (2019-08-10). "Jeffrey Epstein Camera Malfunction: Proof to Rumor Emerges Weeks Later". Heavy.com. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Article on Jeffrey Epstein Camera Malfunction; Coudrey is briefly quoted; tabloid quality source | No | No | WP:NOTTABLOID/ WP:SIGCOV |
| Hines, Jan. "Behind the Growing Political Social Media Powerhouse Headed by Marketing CEO Michael Coudrey". Retrieved 2019-12-12. | Interview of Michael Coudrey in Sweet Startups; source often interviews people for pay; lacks independence and is too closely connected to the subject to count towards RS | Yes | No | WP:SIGCOV/ WP:SOURCE |
"Trump Pushes Malaria Drug for Virus But Evidence Is Lacking". www.bloomberg.com. Retrieved 2021-06-17.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
|
Article about Trump, hydroxychloroquine, and the Covid pandemic; Coudrey is quoted briefly | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| "Woman Allegedly Attacked In Austin For Wearing MAGA Cap". Austin, TX Patch. 2019-03-13. Retrieved 2019-12-12. | Article about the alleged attack on Haley Maddox; Coudrey is quoted briefly | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| Giller, Marc (2019-11-14). "Is impeachment just a cover for Obama era corruption?". Conservative Christian News. Retrieved 2019-12-12. | Article on Adam Schiff’s impeachment “inquiry”; Coudrey is quoted briefly; source itself is questionable in quality | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/WP:SOURCE |
| Brigham, Bob. "'The backpedal begins': Trump backs off vaping crackdown — and he 'profited from the vape industry'". www.rawstory.com. Retrieved 2019-12-12. | Article on Trump and vaping policy/agenda; Coudrey is quoted briefly | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS |
| "Analysis | One America News's Ukraine-Rudy Giuliani exposé is a stunning piece of propaganda". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Main subject is the America News Network and Rudy Guiliani's reporting on Joe Biden; Coudrey is mentioned briefly in one sentence | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
"Coronavirus conspiracy-theory video 'Plandemic' shows challenges for big tech". timesfreepress.com. Retrieved 2021-06-17.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
|
Article on the "Plandemic" film; Coudrey briefly quoted | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| "Marketing CEO Michael Coudrey Threatens Author Over Defamation". Beverly Hills, CA Patch. 2019-07-03. Retrieved 2021-06-18. | Local News source covering a twitter fight in what's essentially tabloid type press; this is the local hometown paper of where Coudrey grew up and its independence is questionable | Yes | No | WP:NOTTABLOID/ WP:SIGCOV/WP:SOURCE |
| Wessel, Lindzi (2020-06-22). "'It's a nightmare.' How Brazilian scientists became ensnared in chloroquine politics". Science | AAAS. Retrieved 2021-06-18. | Article is about the use of chloroquine to treat Covid; Coudrey briefly quoted | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| "Fact check: Wisconsin did not have more votes than people registered". Reuters. Reuters. 2020-11-04. Retrieved 2021-06-18. | Article is about rumors surrounding the Wisconsin election. Article corrects wrong information spread by Coudrey and others | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| Re, Gregg (2020-05-26). "Twitter puts warning label on a Trump tweet on mail-in ballots, despite experts backing up Trump's concerns". Fox News. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | Article is about Twitter and Trump and mail-in ballots; Coudrey is briefly quoted | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| Fichera, Angelo (2019-08-12). "Unproven Claim of 'Camera Malfunction' Before Epstein's Death". FactCheck.org. Retrieved 2021-06-18. | Essentially a fact check of Coudrey's and others false claims on Twitter about camera malfunctions before Epstein's death; the rumor is the main subject not Coudrey himself | No | No | WP:NOTNEWS/ WP:SIGCOV |
| "Michael Coudrey". IMDb. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | IMDB/ unreliable source | Yes | No | WP:IMDB |
Comment :You have included a number of sources in the table that are not even mentioned in the article. By you not even looking at the article and realizing these sources aren't included, but still including them in your "source analysis", it coerces the opinions of the community under fraudulent pretenses. Further, if you did not review the article enough to realize your including analysis for sources not even mentioned in the Wikipedia article, how could you submit my article for deletion with any merit? If your actions truly are in good-faith, please also review new sources in your analysis and remove sources not included in the article. JalenPhotos2 (talk) 12:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- @JalenPhotos2 I clearly stated that this was a copy paste from the first AFD and was completely transparent about that in my original post. Many of the sources are identical, and it's an important record of what transpired previously. As such it is pertinent to those evaluating this article. I am happy to go through and weed out the few that were not re-used. I stated earlier that I would be updating this and I still plan to. Lastly, it's the responsibility of each editor to review the article in its current state. Articles are often changed in the course of an AFD, so working on prior comments in never a good modus operandi. Everyone should take the time to form their own opinions. That's the responsible approach. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:02, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- No, you intentionally manipulated the community based on fraudulent and manufactured pretenses, then included sources in the above table that were NOT included in the article in order to intentionally manipulate the community. 3 Delete nominations are based on your fraudulent analysis. You also nominated my account for sockpuppetry, to which was a despicable attempt to "get your way" in a previous dispute. You further nominated my article for deletion. This kind of behavior is unacceptable here and I will be appealing to reverse it. Further, I ask you to stop harassing me. Wikipedia is an inclusive community of many editors. JalenPhotos2 (talk) 20:07, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- @JalenPhotos2 I clearly stated that this was a copy paste from the first AFD and was completely transparent about that in my original post. Many of the sources are identical, and it's an important record of what transpired previously. As such it is pertinent to those evaluating this article. I am happy to go through and weed out the few that were not re-used. I stated earlier that I would be updating this and I still plan to. Lastly, it's the responsibility of each editor to review the article in its current state. Articles are often changed in the course of an AFD, so working on prior comments in never a good modus operandi. Everyone should take the time to form their own opinions. That's the responsible approach. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:02, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per 4meter4's source analysis. Mooonswimmer 23:16, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per the source analysis, most mentions are trivial and non-notable for sources. Oaktree b (talk) 00:52, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Internet, United States of America, and California. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 01:16, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as per source analysis, and Salt. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I am the original author of the article. This article was originally deleted due to lack of WP:SIGCOV, which arose from a hostile dispute between myself and another community member. Many in the community agreed with me and the discussion was fruitful, but ended in a debatable deletion. I have since addressed the deletion points, by adding a substantial amount of new sources, primarily in the fields of business and investment discussing the subject which satisfy WP:SOURCE, WP:SIGCOV, and WP:GNG. In the above Source Analysis table 4meter4 copied the source analysis from the previous article deletion inquiry but he included source links for sources not even included in this article, and did not include any of the new sources on the list above, which coerces the opinions of the community under fraudulent pretenses. He did not review the article enough to realize he's analyzing sources not even mentioned in the Wikipedia entry, so how could he submit for deletion with any merit? He was also active on the last article, and appears to be acting as a "gate-keeper" of information, which is in contradiction to What Wikipedia is not guidelines. I have added WP:SIGCOV articles whereas the subject is the main point of the article, including Yahoo News, Seeking Alpha, Bloomberg, Pitch Deck, many based on the subjects funding rounds and company creations. I have also added source material that passes WP:SIGCOV, whereas the subject is not the main topic but is included as much more than a trivial mention. Due to what appears to be a bad-faith effort for deletion, I encourage everyone to preview the article and conduct their own source analysis rather than use someone else's. The article may need some cleanup, which is debatable, however it should not be excluded from Wikipedia based on all applicable guidelines being met.
- @JalenPhotos2 This is a gross mischaracterization of the history of the last AFD and related conversations. Multiple editors, including Celestina007, myself, and GeneralNotability, expressed concern over the use of single purpose accounts and the likelihood of WP:MEATPUPPETRY or WP:SOCKPUPPETRY. Likewise, multiple editors were making the same or agreeing with the policy based made comments made by myself and user Celestina007 in the last discussion. Misconstruing the last AFD as a conflict between yourself and a single other editor isn't reality, and claiming "community support" from many SPA accounts is doing nothing to lend you credibility. Lastly, copy pasting a relevant document into this AFD that is pertinent is not prejudicial but best practice. Having a record of a relevant argument made in a prior AFD is helpful and useful. Given that I identified that there were differences between the sources in this current article and that analysis, and stated outright that it would need to be updated, I don't see how you could claim anything like fraud or prejudice. Editors voting here should be looking at the article in its current state and the sources for themselves. It's their responsibility. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment To clarify above WP:GNG notation. In regards to Presumed, these quoted pieces (which are more than a trivial mention) creates an assumption that a subject merits its own article because it is contradictory to 'what Wikipedia is not', particularly the rule that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Some of these news sources rely on the subjects 'expertise' in the fields of biotechnology or business, in which he is called upon to provide. JalenPhotos2 (talk) 10:17, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
| Source | Description + Excerpt | Main Subject? | Significant Coverage? | Policy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| "Marketing CEO Michael Coudrey Threatens Author Over Defamation". Beverly Hills, CA Patch. 2019-07-03. Retrieved 2022-06-09. | Patch article discussing a lawsuit launched by Michael Coudrey over allegedly defamatory statements made by an author. Patch is one of the largest local news publications in the domestic United States. The "tabloid type" press comment above is baseless. Subject is the primary focus of the article and discusses his actions in detail. "Marketing CEO Michael Coudrey" | Yes | Yes | PassesWP:Source / Passes WP:SIGCOV |
| Rosenberg, Matthew; Corasaniti, Nick (2019-11-10). "Close Election in Kentucky Was Ripe for Twitter, and an Omen for 2020". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | New York Times article about an election in Kentucky; Coudrey is mentioned briefly, but called upon for his expertise. The New York Times refers to the subject as: "Michael Coudrey, an entrepreneur and activist..." | No | No | Fails WP:SIGCOV, passes WP:GNG |
| "Experts question malaria drug endorsed by Trump as COVID-19 cure but people stockpiling it". ThePrint. 2020-03-22. Retrieved 2022-06-09. | Article about pharmaceutical repurposing drug types for off-label use; Coudrey is mentioned briefly, but called upon for his expertise. They refer to the subject as: "investor, entrepreneur and former biopharmaceutical analyst named Michael Coudrey" | No | Yes | Passes WP:SIGCOV, whereas the subject is not the entire topic but is significantly more than a trivial mention, passes WP:GNG Presumed criteria. |
| "Tova Farms Company Profile: Valuation & Investors | PitchBook". pitchbook.com. Retrieved 2022-06-09. | Largest market-research provider in Venture Capital industry, indicates subject is Founder & Chief Executive Officer of Tova Farms, and discusses large funding rounds of company's the subject controls/and/or founded. | Yes | Yes | Passes WP:SIGCOV / Passes WP:GNG / Passes WP:Source, it is the largest valuation market-research company in VC Funding industry and typically quoted for media discussing subject companies. |
| "Mike Coudrey's Tova Farms Emerges from Stealth with $1M in Seed Funding to Disrupt the Global Avocado Industry". finance.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2022-06-09. | Yahoo News Article about the subject raising $1 million in funding for a company he founded. Quotes subject extensively, and refer to the subject here: "Tova Farms is yet another venture spun out of Pharos Investment Group, the Puerto Rico-based venture capital firm founded by Mike Coudrey." | Yes | Yes | Passes WP:SIGCOV / Passes WP:GNG / Passes WP:Source |
| "Mike Coudrey's Tova Farms Raises Nearly $1 Million In Funding, Adds Strategic Export Partners". finance.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2022-06-09. | News Article discussing subjects fundraising round. Quotes subject extensively, and refer to the subject here: "Serving as Tova Farms Chief Executive Officer, Mike Coudrey said that the value" | Yes | Yes | Passes WP:SIGCOV / Passes WP:GNG / Passes WP:Source |
| Dwilson, Stephanie Dube (2019-08-10). "Jeffrey Epstein Camera Malfunction: Proof to Rumor Emerges Weeks Later". Heavy.com. Retrieved 2021-06-17. | News Article discussing Jeffrey Epstein's prison term. Subject is not the main topic, but is mentioned and quoted extensively, which satisfies WP:SIGCOV's guidance on more than a trivial mention. The article was created to discuss the subjects claims, which it proves as accurate. | No | Yes | Passes WP:SIGCOV / Passes WP:GNG |
| "Tova Farms haalt €880.000 op aan startkapitaal om de avocadosector te hervormen". www.agf.nl (in Dutch). Retrieved 2022-06-09. | German government site focusing on agriculture news. Subject is the main topic and discusses the subjects company financing rounds, and discuses the overall outlook of the subjects company and market. | Yes | Yes | Passes WP:SIGCOV / Passes WP:GNG |
| "Mike Coudrey's Tova Farms Emerges from Stealth with $1M in Seed Funding to Disrupt the Global Avocado Industry | Seeking Alpha". seekingalpha.com. Retrieved 2022-06-09. | Leading investment news outlet discusses the subject and his companies. Quotes subjects expertise extensively. | Yes | Yes | Passes WP:SIGCOV / Passes WP:GNG |
| Wessel, Lindzi (2020-06-22). "'It's a nightmare.' How Brazilian scientists became ensnared in chloroquine politics". Science | AAAS. Retrieved 2021-06-18. | Article from biotechnology news outlet Science Magazine. This one is a debatable one, yet highly interesting for discussion. Subject is not the main topic, but arguably a large cause in the articles creation. In my opinion it passes WP:SIGCOV for this reason, and mentions the subject in a substantial capacity. | No | Yes | Passes WP:SIGCOV on 'more than a trivial mention' / Passes WP:GNG on 'Presumed criteria.' |
- Comment. @JalenPhotos2 You don't have an accurate understanding of what constitutes significant coverage. WP:SIGCOV state, "Significant coverage addresses the topic directly and in detail." This means merely being quoted or giving an expert opinion in a news article on a different subject is not significant coverage, no matter how much you want it to be. The source must be about Michael J. Coudrey to count towards WP:GNG. This also means that any evaluation of TovaFarms as notable does not extend to Coudrey because notability is not inherited. You can not use articles where Coudrey is giving an opinion on a different topic or content about Tova Farms's notability as evidence of Coudrey's notability. Likewise, significant coverage must be independent. For example, the Yahoo news article you list as significant coverage is a press release provided directly from Pharos Investment Group. (which it states at the bottom of the article) As such it lacks independence and can not be counted as SIGCOV. All of the sources you are claiming as SIGCOV above have issues with either independence, not addressing the topic directly (i.e. being about someone or something other than Coudrey), or have quality problems because of WP:TABLOID. The fact that you are not able to discern the poor quality of the content provided by Patch.com is concerning. The use of hyperlocal news content, which is how patch.com markets itself, is not encyclopedic. The covering of a essentially a twitter fight and a non-signicant legal dispute is tabloid fodder and should not be used per WP:NOTGOSSIP and policy at WP:BLPGOSSIP. 4meter4 (talk) 17:42, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment You say this, yet ALL 3 nominations for deletion are based on your fraudulent analysis, which included sources that were not even mentioned in the article. Then to "escape blame", you say that it's "good practice" to do your own source analysis, but yet all 3 deletion votes are based on fraudulent and manufactured pretenses (IE. your fabricated "analysis"). These actions DO affect the community. These actions DO change opinion. If you are truly acting in 'good-faith', then you should remove the sources that were not included in the article in order to accurately represent the article. Further, you should make this very clear in the opening statements that you are including sources and article links that are not even in the Wikipedia article itself. Your actions have tarnished this deletion page under fraudulent pretenses, and I hope an admin can clearly notice and see this when making a determination for deletion. JalenPhotos2 (talk) 20:16, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I made an edit simply because the article appeared on a CS1 maintenance page because of incorrectly formatted citations. I am not expressing an opinion about the merits of the article. Ira Leviton (talk) 18:17, 10 June 2022 (UTC)