Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodney burrell

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 SPEEDY DELETE per author request and WP:SNOW.  But|seriously|folks  04:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rodney burrell

Rodney burrell (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Claim of notability but still unsure. -WarthogDemon 04:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• As far as Mr Burrell's validity as a person of interest, just google or yahoo search him. He has been featured in AP News, as well as the Tampa Trib, Florida Gun News, Blend Magazine, and Makes and Models Magazine. I obviously cannot give out, nor do I have personal information of his celebrity contacts, but I assure you they are valid. Dechen Thurman, brother of Uma Thurman, is listed as an employee on www.hotwriting.com/bios.htmlNewswire79 04:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. Anyone think this reeks of copyvio? Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 05:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment If so, it's copied from somebody who can't spell very well. Clarityfiend 05:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• I don't see how it's a violation if he agreed to the article. Again, all the articles are verifiable in person, or by a simple search. I don't see why I'm getting such a hassle for simply writing a story.Newswire79 05:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Delete - google hits, few as they are, appear to be either self-generated or other people. Peter Ballard 05:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Delete? I'm looking at google right now and Mr. Burrell is plastered on there. Pit Crew Live, one of his partnerships is all over the place, plus if you go deeper into the search, you'll see more info as far as the tribune and AP features. Without Walls International Church articles, etc. --Newswire79 05:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

"Rodney Burrell" generates 215 hits on google. Whoop-dee-doop. Of them, a large proportion are press releases listing Rodney Burrell as the contact, i.e. they're self-generated. Non-notable, I say. Peter Ballard 05:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Many extravagant, unverifiable pseudo-claims - "currently in the process of launching", "still in negotiations", "working on this boxing publication". What has he actually done to merit an article? "has been spotted with many of today's A-Listers" could just as easily mean he's a gofer. Besides, notability doesn't rub off on acquaintances (if that's what he is). Where are the sources? Clarityfiend 05:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• I don't think they're extravagant claims. These are projects that I asked him about and that was the answer i got. A gopher? He very well could be. But I do know that he pays Dechen Thurman a substancial amount of money for writing for his company, Hotwriting.com. What has he done you ask? He's 28 and he built a million dollar business by himself. There's nothing more verifiable than going to one of his 3 offices as seeing it operate.

He didn't want me to reveal his sources, but he and Jeff Lacy are working the boxing publication. I've personally seen him and MJ together playing pool at Whiskey Park North in Tampa, Florida. He was at Derek Jeeters B-Day Party, Bowling with Michael Pittman and His wife. Dinner with Gary Sheffield and his wife Deleon. And Partying with Keenan Ivory Wayans...the guy is a mover, shaker networking genius for being 28.Newswire79 05:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Most of the businesses he is described as being involved with in this article are in negotiations, in planning or otherwise not yet actually in operations. "Rodney Burrell" appears to be a somewhat common name, so the writer of the article should provide links to the relevant sources which he says can be found by a Google or Yahoo search, since he can presumably sort them out. In addition, the article is currently formatted as an interview rather than as a encyclopedic biographic article. --Metropolitan90 05:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, a melange of pseudo claims. Additionally, the website for newswire79 describes the company's services as "provid[ing] media attention to standout personalities in entertainment, business, sports, and music". Of course, they also claim they do not write "promotional pieces", but "researched" materials "deemed media worthy". If there's such a crack staff on the job here providing the sources should be second nature. Instead, we get vague PR-speak (above) such as "the guy is a mover, shaker networking genius". This is strongly indicative of a conflict of interest and I suggest keeping a close watch on Newswire79 (talk · contribs). --Dhartung | Talk 06:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I've since wikified this article and removed the cv information to talk. I don't have time to do more at the moment. If more third party sources could be found for WP:V, there appears to be some links to articles in the cv which might be useful to flesh this out more. Nicko (Talk•Contribs) 07:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC) Sorry, wrong nomination. Nicko (Talk•Contribs) 12:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Article is based mainly on an interview by someone who works on a website. Reliable sources (such as the Tampa Tribune) have editorial oversight; this website does not appear to have the same kind of oversight and therefore does not appear to be a reliable source. Much of the article is original research - without all sources 100% revealed totally and completely from the start, editors can't gauge the veracity of the information provided. There are also strong indications of conflict of interest, as Dhartung said. The peacock language also makes me wonder if this isn't advertising spam. All he seems to be doing is starting up a bunch of companies - there are a thousand people doing that in every city in every country on Earth today. --Charlene 07:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Newswire79 14:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)It's not SPAM! What am I trying to sell? Nothing. Yes there are people starting businesses all over the world, but not many at 23 years old..Now 28 years old that own a million dollar company with many more on the horizon. May I ask all who defy this article, what were you doing at 23? probably drinking beer an trying to score...Writing essays and failing tests. This young man was building businesses. His first business plan was at 17 years old. If the writing seems like spam, then I'll change the style, but there is no reason to delete an article simply because people don't "think it's valid" I think it's a great story about a young business professional. I don't see how people cannot be anything but inspired by Mr. Burrell's accomplishments at such a young age. If you choose to discriminate, so be it. Newswire79 14:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - it's not discrimination as it is notable. It's not a matter of discrmination. It's a matter of notability. The fact that a person inspires people doesn't necessarily mean that person is notable. I've inspired people, but I'm definitely not notable enough for my own article (which, for my own sake, I'm quite glad about . . .) -WarthogDemon 21:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Utterly non-notable. Greswik 15:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Newswire79 15:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Format has been changed to a less "Promotional" style and more informational. References and link are provided.

• Delete - as mentioned above, this looks like it doesn't have any reliable sources to work from; a PR writer's interview is not a reliable source. Tony Fox (arf!) review? 20:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete A young guy starts a business. More news at 11. Cap'n Walker 21:35, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable person. Fails WP:BIO. Article created by PR company, violates WP:COI. No properly cited reliable sources. -- Gogo Dodo 20:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - The article's creator says he was instructed by Rodney's lawyer to take down the article. Does this affect the decision making process at all? And on a sidenote, I find it rather odd Burrell's lawyer would say that. What the heck was the interview intended for then? -WarthogDemon 00:50, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Newswire79 01:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Under advisement from Mr. Burrell's legal representation, Nigro&Malley they requested that the article be removed. The reason is simple, it's begining to cause a problem. There shouldn't have been a debate in the first place. Mr. Burrell would rather not be listed in Wikipedia then to have to answer to only God knows who about the validity of his business sense and accomplishments.

He's not that media hungry of a person, his lawyer said to me: "Take it down,Mr. Burrell has a business to run. I can't help it if Wikipedia is full people who have nothing else better to do than to pick apart articles that don't harm anyone.Go get a job, and a life."

I told you people that this was not spam. I was simply trying to showcase a notable young business talent, No, he's not bill gates, but he's someone that's making a difference in the business world for young business professionals. Everyone is picking apart his business and credentials, so Delete it.Newswire79 01:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Newswire79 02:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)I would also like to be deleted or blocked out of this program. I can't stand wikipedia anymore. I don't see how anna nicole smith, or chris benoit is any more important than Mr. Burrell. At least he's a productive member of society. I guess fame buys you notoriety, not brains or great business sense.Newswire79 02:06, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. You have totally misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. Clarityfiend 02:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Newswire79 04:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Delete the freaking page then! And i won't have to attack anyone Warthog...You guys win, just delete the freaking article, or promo piece, or advertisment, or whatever you guys want to call it. Delete it. It's making everyone look bad, including Mr. Burrell, get it off of here....NOW!

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.