Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Markus Frind

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 redirect to PlentyOfFish. MBisanz ^talk 22:19, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Markus Frind

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

Not notable outside of POF, (rightly) limited personal info here would fit on PlentyofFish nicely. Anmccaff (talk) 16:14, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

redirect per nom - a basic BEFORE shows lots of RSes mentioning his name, but all concerning PlentyOfFish and without substantial biographical details. I found non-RSes with bio details, so it's possible an RS has covered them - David Gerard (talk) 16:57, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to PlentyofFish; the subject is not independently notable per available sources. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:37, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:39, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the sources I provided below, and see also WP:JUSTNOTNOTABLE. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and then Redirect with the genuine basis of there actually being no separate information of an article of her own therefore aside from the clearly best claims existing, "founder of PlentyofFish", there's nothing to sensibly save. SwisterTwister talk 06:23, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – This notable businessman comfortably passes WP:BASIC per available sources. See source examples below, and note that additional sources are also available in online searches that cover him, his life, his background, his entrepreneurship, etc. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:29, 11 October 2016 (UTC) (Addendum: I struck duplicate sources in my list below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:42, 11 October 2016 (UTC))[reply]

References

Keep: per North America's excellent WP:NEXIST. Safehaven86 (talk) 05:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a simple google-dredge. It includes a regurgitated clickbait article, two or three copies of an identical syndicated column, and several articles which are essentially about the company, not the man. Anmccaff (talk) 05:40, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

+1, these sources don't contain significant biographical detail about the subject. Literally all his notability is from Plentyoffish - David Gerard (talk) 05:50, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For me, the NYT and BBC articles listed above, plus Inc, Global News, and Business Insider establish his notability. The articles contain significant information about him, including focusing on how he built a fortune by apparently working only ten hours a week. At a minimum, the article should be merged/redirected, although I think it meets WP:GNG on its own.Safehaven86 (talk) 17:13, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to PlentyOfFish (but preserve history). Typical WP:BIO1E. We don't need to create another new page about him. Considering the small amount of information in the article, I would say a redirect suffices here. Anything required can be easily pulled out from the history. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:21, 11 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to PlentyOfFish per BLP1E - Is only notable for one thing which is founding this site, Other than that they're not known for anything, Better off redirected. –Davey2010^Talk 00:11, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the company. The best sources, the NYT and the BBC cover him only incidentally--90% of each of the article is about the notable company. DGG ( talk ) 16:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sources turned up by NorthAmerica, which include profiles in major RS (New York Times, BBC, Globe and Mail) support notability independent of the company he founded - and has now sold. They also supply material from which article can be expanded.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:38, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, ongoing coverage in major RS news outlets long after sale of company. [1].E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:30, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:GNG/WP:BASIC. User:Northamerica1000 could have stopped at the third citation; this AfD is carpetbombed with significant coverage whose primary focus is Marcus Frind. The coverage is related to his company, but it is clearly about how Frind's life experience, personality, abilities, attitudes, etc, affect the company. There is other source coverage whose primary subject is PlentyOfFish, and those articles are not the same as these. Red herrings: WP:BLP1E only applies to low-profile individuals, not Frind. The significant coverage of Frind in major media is dated 2007, 2008, 2012, 2014, 2016... How is that one event? The 2007 WSJ and NYT profiles found significance in Frind's individual productivity running such a high traffic/profitable website alone. The 2012 Globe and Mail profile covers Frind's childhood, education, family, and personality to shed light on his current business practices running a larger company. In 2015, the coverage was about the sale of his company. The list goes on. One event? Many events. Low profile? Absurd. Is his role in the event(s) not substantial or well documented? Also absurd. Bio doesn't even pass one of the three main criteria of BLP1E. WP:BIO1E would be appropriate only if Frind were not alive, but even then it has looser criteria than BLP1E. An article about non-living person can be kept if only two of the conditions are met; with a living person, you can still delete the article if they are low-profile. Also, PlentyOfFish is a company, not an event. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dennis Bratland: Thanks for your detailed analysis. As an "other stuff exists" comparison, Frind may not be quite as notable as Steve Jobs, but overall, I feel that he passes WP:BASIC relative to the depth of coverage he has received. Being the founder of the world's largest online dating website is not exactly small apples. I wonder what would occur if Jobs' article was nominated for deletion. After all, he's mostly known just for for Apple, like it's just one "event" too, right? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to PlentyOfFish. WP:BIO1E. User:Northamerica1000's sources are covering the person only in respect to PlentyOfFish, and the articles are really about PlentyOfFish. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:28, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Frind is not dead. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 05:31, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see no BLP problems. Therefore not a BLP1E case. It therefore falls to being a BIO1E issue, although there is still the WP:CORP angle. A bio on a single company CEO is really an article on the company. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BLP problems are not what distinguishes these two standards. Where are you getting that from? One is for living people, the other is not. Also what exactly is the "one event"? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 07:32, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

BIO1E isn't solely for dead people. And the "event" here is broadly considered to being the founder of a company. The decision whether to create a standalone page depends on the amount of coverage available. For certain people like Mark Zuckerberg who have a lot of coverage, it requires a separate article. However, for someone like the subject of this article, it is best covered in the article of the company itself. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:32, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you find yourself having to torture the meaning of a simple English word to make an argument, it could be the premise is flawed. Every example or description at WP:EVENT is a breaking news event; none are companies or careers. Same at the two biographical standards. Neither of which says you get to choose whichever one serves you best. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 16:21, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not "torturing" the meaning, but event is broadly defined as an occurrence. It is not restricted to a breaking news event. The subject being a CEO is...one event? Or is it multiple events? Additionally, the guideline to be considered is WP:NOPAGE. The coverage here is more about the company than the person. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 19:46, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's valid if you want to advocate broadening the scope of "one event" this way, but it is unprecedented. Maybe consensus will be that we should begin interpreting the guidelines this way, but for the reasons already given I don't think it's a good idea. The editorial judgement that a standalone page is not helpful to readers is also a valid opinion, though I disagree in this case. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:27, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 22:52, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Well, comments. First, I think the idea that being the founder and CEO of any major enterprise is not a point event in the sense used above. I'd also add there appears to be some ide that seeing Frind as not separately notable is a kind of personal criticism. It's not, or at least need not be. His actual available bio does seem to tie back almost entirely into information suited for the POF article, though, and until that changes, there is little to be gained from having two separate articles. Anmccaff (talk) 06:07, 24 October 2016 (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.