Talk:Brett Walton

Notability

• CEO of a major videogame website
• Member of the AIAS
• Interviewed and quoted by numerous peers
• An expert in his field—Preceding unsigned comment added by TadjHolmes (talk • contribs)

Hello, and thanks for contributing. Being CEO of a notable company doesn't automatically confer notability, nor does membership of the Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences. So far only one interview has been supplied from a WP:Secondary source, and I can't find any more coverage of him online from WP:Reliable sources. Can you please supply some? Thanks, Top Jim (talk) 13:49, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Advertisement

How is it written like an advertisement? TadjHolmes (talk) 09:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Merge

Obviously, Brett Walton being the CEO of his company, he should be mentioned in depth in its article. But seeing as how he is nothing besides that, the article goes in violation of the BLP rule of people being notable for one event. If all you are notable for is your company, then you are not notable. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 11:09, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Support I can't find significant coverage of other than the interviews, and these are more about the website IMO than him. BLP1E is for something different, but I agree that merging is the best option, particularly as the AfD closed as no consensus. SmartSE (talk) 12:28, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Strong Support - Recent AfD for Brett Walton was closed as keep based on rather weak criteria (most keep votes even said such). Merging would be necessary anyway since Walton fails WP:BLP1E. Also, this allows the content to be centralized. --Teancum (talk) 13:03, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Not Support - How is it any different to these examples - Rupert Loman, Jesse Divnich, Simon Carless, Dustin Moskovitz, Andrew McCollum, Brian Crecente? JadamHosey (talk) 13:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

That other stuff exists is a poor argument. We're discussing this article, based on the references that exist. SmartSE (talk) 16:00, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Of course, but it does seem as though the subject is being targeted here when others in a similar situation (CEO of a website) with nothing else notable are able to remain without issue. JadamHosey (talk) 16:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, he is notable not only for being CEO of the website but also as a public industry analyst (as has been discussed at length in the AfD) - his citations aren't as a CEO as website but as an expert in his field, called upon to comment on an industry matter. JadamHosey (talk) 16:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

While I dispute the notion that he is an expert in his field, he is identified as such through his work on VGChartz. His expertise isn't independent from the web site. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:10, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Support appears to have no notability other than CEO of VGChartz (and per Smartse, most coverage is about website). Thanks! Fin©™ 17:28, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Strong support. I am shocked that an AfD did not result in a delete consensus for this article. The independent sources here primarily offer a passing mention of Walton while they mention his site, or they quote him without providing any additional information other than that he is the CEO of VGChartz. This establishes him as a spokesman for the notable company - not as notable himself. Since this is a merge discussion and I can't !vote to delete, I agree with a merge. -Addionne (talk) 18:54, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Implementation

Ok, it looks like there is a consensus to merge, as the only person to object is a sock who clearly has a COI. I'm not sure what there is to merge though, the media coverage is already in the article, as are the interviews, and the rest is self published so shouldn't be used anyway. Have I missed anything, or should I just go ahead and redirect it? SmartSE (talk) 13:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Everything that is verifiable is already in the other article. -Addionne (talk) 14:52, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done SmartSE (talk) 15:09, 15 November 2010 (UTC)