Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freddie Beckitt

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. No penalty for creating a redirect from this page to another article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Freddie Beckitt

[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)

low-profile individual. – Ploni (talk) 05:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Ploni (talk) 05:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. As this article relates to unique opportunity an individual has created being unemployed I feel this as a good motivation to the general public. He is the only case of person earning by standing in queue for someone. The article meets notability criteria for individuals. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 05:23, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete: provides absolutely nothing of substance to the encyclopedia, and the premise of a feel-good "rags to riches" fantasy isn't justification to keep a glorified LinkedIn profile around. Doesn't even mention the single event they are supposedly famous for. DeVosMax [ contribs • talk • created media ] 07:16, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, very brief article here regardless. Oaktree b (talk) 14:13, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG - a brief quirky item for the end of a bad news day, perhaps, but not notable. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:42, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a newspaper. This means we do not cover news events as such, and only things that have long term impact. It also means that we do not have to have an article on every person featured in a filler feel good story meant to fill out a slow news day.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:01, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Non-notable. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:02, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ploni,DeVos Max,Oaktree b,Alexandermcnabb,John Pack Lambert and Lakun.patra. Thanks for sharing your inputs. However want to share that 1. It meets Wikipedia notability policy and 2.will be helpful to wider public 3.Given an opportunity can expand too when needed 4.No need to cover as newspaper but can highlight the efforts which can be possible by everyone. It really will help to motivate the unemployed. Kindly consider your opinion. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 03:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am 100% certain in my original conclusion. Absolutely does not meet criteria for notability, as he is famous for a single thing (violating

WP:BLP1E

), plus, I don't want to put too fine a point on this, the article is completely valueless. There's just not enough information on this random dude to justify making a page.

Also, please don't try to imply that this tabloid-style article is somehow "inspiring for the unemployed", it's insulting to those suffering through economic hardship, and demonstrates that you don't know anything about the cycle of poverty.

DeVosMax [ contribs • talk • created media ] 05:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This isn't a feel good exercise; either notable or not. No biographical info and basically a bullet point article. I'd support a redirect to Queue area. Oaktree b (talk) 11:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete per
WP:BLP1E. Also, I highly doubt that this article does anything to actually help the unemployed, especially given that this is an article that averages below 1 pageview per day. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:14, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete - Leaving aside the fact that this does not read like an encyclopaedic article, there is no sign that this individual comes close to meeting notability thresholds as others have noted. Dunarc (talk) 20:54, 28 June 2022 (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.