Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Price

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 keep. clpo13_(talk) 22:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Price

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP1E-style issues. Every reference is of the form "the guy who paid everyone $70,000". Most of them are either interviews with him. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:48, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:48, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:48, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:48, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The wage thing may have been a stunt to gain coverage, but it in fact gained coverage. BD2412 T 17:56, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Gravity Payments. There certainly seems to be notability and coverage here, but boarding on WP:BLP1E. SkippyKR (talk) 18:55, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot object to this merge proposal; that said some of the BLP-related issues ought not be merged. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 05:25, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets GNG, goes past BLP1E – is it true that his ex wife's abuse allegations and lawsuit by his brother probably got more attention because of the earlier publicity stunt? Sure! But he's received media coverage from multiple reliable sources outside of that one event. — Ghost River 21:44, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- People who have received coverage of private legal disputes as a result of being known to the press because of one event is exactly what BLP policy is intended to remove from the encyclopedia. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 05:14, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - That is not actually true. BLP1E clarifies that all three criteria be met, one of which is that the person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Price did not fade into obscurity after cutting his own salary. WP:ONEEVENT also clarifies that Someone may have become famous due to one event, but may nevertheless be notable for more than one event. Finally, although it is an essay, WP:NOT1E also explicitly states that Subjects who were first notable for one event, and rode that fame into attention on their other endeavours fall outside of BLP1E. Our BLP policy is actually designed to remove individuals like Ken Bone, who received his 15 minutes of fame for wearing a red sweater to a presidential debate and then fell out of the spotlight. — Ghost River 06:07, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. GNG. peterl (talk) 04:02, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.