Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coach Meddy - Wikipedia


Article Images
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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:04, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Coach Meddy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:Notability guideline. Note that this article is declared paid editing, which is relevant as supporting evidence that many of the refs are paid advertorials. I spent a long time examining all of the refs in the article and detailing them below, to save everone else the work. I find none qualify as independant reliable signficant coverage. I also searched for additional sources and found no useful ones. That search may have suffered from the fact that I was unable to determine "Coach Meddy"'s actual name! The fact that his actual name appears in NONE of the twelve refs is further evidence of the cookie-cutter paid advertorial nature of nearly all refs here.

List of sources and analysis collapsed for convenience

  • timeoutdubai.com
    It is not relevant whether the site is Reliable. Meddy receives passing mention in two sentences. Meddy is not even the main subject of either sentence. Worthless for establishing Notability.
  • foxsportsasia.com
    Appears to be Reliable, however Meddy receives a one-sentence passing mention. Worthless for establishing Notability.

I believe every source below is an over-the-top paid advertorial, almost certainly all written by the same author. Nearly all of the sources are websites with tiny "staff", no reputation for anything, and either explicity state that they carry paid advertorials or are rampant with blatant paid advertorials.

  • telegraphstar.com
    Not Reliable. Explicitly carries paid advertorials. Their advertize page states: "Advertorial Guest Posting Method : We are publishing your informational / advertorial articles in our website, news articles".
  • newsblaze.com
    Not Reliable. Explicitly carries paid stories. Their contact page states: "Done For You Media Exposure Program Outline ... Press Release, Followup interviews, Followup stories and social followup."
  • thriveglobal.com
    Not Reliable. Explicitly carries paid advertorials. Their media partnerships page states: "Custom-branded packaging and placement in our high-impact editorial content."
  • arizonadailyregister.com
    Not Reliable. Author is explicitly a paid-content marketer. At the bottom of the article About the Author states "Shane is a cryptocurrency journalist and an ICO writing consultant at The Written Craft content service." Going to The Written Craft, he states "This is where I offer my blockchain content writing and copywriting services... I’m a certified content marketer."
  • kathmandutribune.com (there is currently an open AFD for this site)
    Not Reliable. Tiny staff and invites article submissions. The about page states the site is run by two people, plus two foreign correspondents. Also the contact page states: "Kathmandu Tribune welcomes submissions of op-eds and articles on any topic for publication in online." I could find no explicit statement whether payment would help get an article onto the website. However I think the "article" answers this for itself.
  • TGDaily.com
    Not Reliable. I can't find explicit advertizing info, but it looks like just about every article in the Health section is a paid ad.
  • oneworldherald.com
    Not Reliable. Same issue as TGDaily. Spotchecking articles turned up rampant blatant avdertorials / product links. I only need to cite one of their "articles" to make the point:
  • newdaylive.com
    Not Reliable. Same issue as TGDaily and oneworldherald. This article tells you where to buy the best buy Marijauna-oil, and this OMG-advertorial tells you what company to call to have a docor come to your home and hydrate you via IV. You know, for people who are too rich too busy to hydrate by... actually drinking beverages. The ad article says the service is available in "29 metropolitan markets in the United States, United Kingdom, and Spain". Sorry Canadians, you'll have to actually drink your beverages by mouth. Swallowing counts as exercise now.
  • kivodaily.com
    The cited article was posted by Dillon Kivo, listed as Editor-In-Chief of kivodaily. Guess what that means? It means Dillon Kivo SELFPUBLISHed the content on his his personal website. However one of the key criteria of Wikipedia guidelines for a source to qualify as Reliable is that it subjects content to responsible editorial review. SELFPUBLISHed content, Not Reliable.
  • freepressjournal.in
    This appears to be the website of an actual paper newspaper in India. I'll invite anyone else to comment on the quality of the source. However the content itself is a blatant advertorial and obviously Not Reliable. I believe almost anyone who has actually read the sources up to this point should be able to recognize that the text of this source has been written by the same over-the-top author.

Alsee (talk) 23:46, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 07:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 07:34, 5 June 2019 (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.