Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Austin Ryan Fuentes

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:51, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Austin Ryan Fuentes

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. 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 by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

Austin Ryan Fuentes (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Quick summary: Non-notable bio. Long version: I've had an eye on this article from the day I saw in on the newly added articles list. At the time it was fishy, but I decided to give it the inclusionist benefit of the doubt. Over time I haven't been convinced: Merely being rich heir doesn't always make you notable (There are literally many hundreds of billionaires these days). The primary notability hooks within the article are: Having a one credit IMDB sheet (coincidentally a documentary that was specifically about rich kids who have no particular notability); (2) photos of the subject with notable people (again many people have such photos and it doesn't make a person notable); (3) being involved with charities (millions of wealthy doctors and lawyers do the same, where are their articles?). If he was the head of a company, or some kind of famous investor, a notable artist, or something, then there would be a hook. Right now, beyond copies of his Wikipedia, he flunks the Google test. I am not making these points to denigrate whatever noble work the subject is contributing to, but I do not see how these reach the level of notability yet. I initially brought up these concerns on the associated discussion page, but I found the answers to be inadequate: to summarize the given argument, because he's donated money to charity and hosted events, he's notable enough for Wikipedia. I disagree. If this nomination fails, I respect the decision, but this article just doesn't seem to warrant inclusion. Bobak 19:43, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per the (highly detailed) nom. Just ain't notable. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 20:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom; NN playboy. Bigdaddy1981 22:15, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 06:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I'm mostly not participating in Wikipedia anymore, but for context, I weakly supported the article, way back when because of the external verification of his philanthropy (I'm not sure if throwing lots of money at a charity and hanging out with celebrities is notable... it's notable in some contexts, I suppose). Still, if this article went away, I'm not convinced Wikipedia would be the lesser for it. -Harmil 15:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
• Keep How can you delete this guy? I heard about this guy one time at Citrus College he and his family have done so many things from helping hospitals to charities, I met him when he spoke in our Macro Econ class about world economics and social status in regards to family wealth, it was very interesting, when he spoke (Fall 2006) we where given packages from a production company he was starting with a friend, he also gave a little speech on world poverty and what we can do to help, he was/is designing a low-cost device to help those injured by land mines. We recieved a small bio (which i'll go over below) from our instructur which outlined his considerable donations, he and his family are the largest single private donor to the MS society, you can find his name engraved on walls at UCLA and John's Hopkins among others. I would think that if a person was courious to know who this person is they see on the wall(s) this site would be the optimal means of preserving who that person is. I know that he is also the primary sponsor for an MS Research Center at USC being developed and is often at White House events because the family is very political (Republican) and somewhat influencial especially in charity fields and aerospace (his grandfather owned and managed an aerospace company and was also a Boeing exec., he is also an accomplished inventor/engineer). I know that he translated that influence into Hollywood and made a point to help out other persons of Spanish origin. Thats not to mention any well known actresses/models he dated or all the other events he attends (Grammy's, Oscars, etc.) but none of that is really important in an overall sense, infact I would consider Austins notibility for more then any actor for the shear fact that actors or people that just inheret great wealth such as the young Onasis that got married a few years back. And I agree that in some sense wealth and social status alone does justify notability however in this case I think it goes far deeper then that. Now I dont know if all that constitutes notability but I just wanted to say that from what I heard from him I was deeply motivated to help others in my community (Pasadena) and I wouldnt want to ever take away from his contributions to others that are in my opionion very notable for many reasons beyond the abnormal cash ammounts to charities. Lets all keep in mind that this is one of the most level-headed, down to earth people you'd ever meet so I think if it was up to him he wouldnt care if this page was here, I mean thats why many of his donations are annonymous so that people wouldnt make a big issue out of what he thinks is just the right thing to do (his words). I just want people to know that truth, and the truth is he's notable and really an inspiring life story in so many ways. Thanks for taking my vote into consideration. -David Robinson
• Keep If being wealthy, young, single, philanthropic, and also be a minority and have such a diverse background and life doesn’t justify notability then what does? If it didn’t then we wouldn’t hear about all the other kids like we do; the Trump children, Georgina Bloomberg, Brandon Davis, Cassandra Mann, and even Paris Hilton who if you where recall came onto the spotlight due to that porn movie… Its not so much partying with all the other socialites or going to skiing in the alps that makes someone notable but in this case you combine the social-standing with personal wealth with good deeds done and I think you have a pretty good case for someone to be notable. As to agree with the above comment, I think that people would want to know about the guy written about on the wall or attending various invite-only events. I was looking back and originally the page talked about his ex girlfriends such as Eva Mendes and various models, it discussed the circles he traveled in and so forth but in time even these notable people where deleted off in favor of streamlining the page (I assume) and streamlined it showed the most notable characteristics of 2007; abnormal wealth, and abnormal philanthropy combined in a person that is really just a nice, down-to-earth guy. I also agree with the other argument that if wealth alone was/is not notable then this site wouldn’t have so much devoted to the topic but I also agree that wealth alone should not be the only thing you should be able to say about a person. PeanutMan 16:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I've made my argument on the discussions page, I think other people on here have read it as well and integrated it into their arguments. If this page gets deleted I'm not going to jump off a building I just think it would be a shame and send the message that being extraordinary in the world of philanthropy doesnt mean you'll make the cut for the site, when you'll go to a list and see a dozen names of people of high net worth with nothing to say about them. If he's going to be on here anyway isnt it logical to say something about him when people click on his name rather then them just guessing? Bruce12 16:39, 3 July 2007 (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.