Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kris Herzog

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. Michig (talk) 08:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kris Herzog

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Many references but almost all are tabloid-type rags. The article was apparently written and almost exclusively edited by one editor (probably the subject). It reads like an advertisement for the subject and his company. Bbb23 (talk) 22:40, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:03, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The piece has been edited by a number of people, none of which actually know the subject (to my knowledge). He is a noteworthy figure, hence the reason I chose to do an article on him. The dilemma is he seems to severely limit his interaction with the press. I've asked if anyone on here can assist in making it read less like an advertisement, but only one individual has yet to try and help. --Aad351 (talk) 23:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your brief edit history and your comments are unusual. It's odd that a journalism student would pick this particular person to write an article about. And I have no direct evidence that you are the subject or know the subject. Strictly speaking, it doesn't matter for the purpose of this discussion. However, your statement that "he seems to severely limit his interaction with the press" is directly at odds with his website. Indeed, he seems to crave publicity. I don't know whom you've asked to improve the article, but I can tell you that I wouldn't be interested because, as is obvious from my nomination, I don't believe the article should even be here. Even if the consensus is to keep the article, or there is no consensus, which defaults to a keep, I wouldn't want to work on the article. Regardless, the community will have the final word (not me) on whether the subject is sufficiently notable.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why wouldn't you work on it? When I say "severely limits his interaction," I mean he doesn't speak much to most of the press, but clearly he's a notable figure. If you're not open to work on it, is there any suggestions you could make to help me fix it? It'd be appreciated. --Aad351 (talk) 01:40, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is really not relevant to this process, but how do you know "he doesn't speak much to most of the press"?--Bbb23 (talk) 01:43, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I spent 2 months researching Kris Herzog, the world he lives and works in is primarily reported on by media sources like TMZ and TMZ.com, CelebDirtyLaundry, LickAblecelebs.com, RadarOnline.com, etc.... I also included more mainstream ones like; Los Angeles CBS 2 / KCAL 9, People Magazine, US Weekly, Life and Style weekly and several others listed on my Wikipedia page, which combined have published over 247 stories about Herzog, his Book, My True Hollywood Story and/or his company, The Bodyguard Group over the last 4 years.

As for Independent, since over 50% of the stories on TMZ and TMZ.com do NOT show Herzog in a good light, I would say they those are as Independent as you get.

The 21 Independent and verifiable sources I list include several national news media outlets like: Los Angeles CBS 2 / KCal 9 which have aired 2 News Anchor Sharon Tay in depth news investigations about Herzog (re Mel Gibson) for a total of over 10 minutes of air time, it was then re run nationally and internationally.

Herzog has been the central figure in over a dozen national and international news stories in just the last 4 years and that is far more than thousands of others who currently have pages on Wikipedia.

Herzog owns the only company in the United States that gets jobs for free for U.S. Navy SEAL team members and others.

Herzog was a key and central figure in some of the biggest news stories of 2009, 2010, 2011, Mel Gibson and Herman Cain.

Herzog's story is noteworthy and as 50% or more of the news stories I have sighted DO NOT paint him in a good light, this is clearly* NOT** self promotion, advertising or an auto biography.

**TMZ calls him a convicted felon who likes to impersonate cops, etc....

When you Google search: 1. Kris Herzog, 2. Kristian Herzog or 3. Kris Herzog Book, you get millions of results and Herzog has a higher standing and more noteworthiness than thousands of *people that currently have Wikipedia pages.

Like his contemporary Gavin De Becker. who currently has a Wikipedia page.

I have never met or spoken to him and only started this project to learn about Journalism and Wikipedia.

Amanda, NYC Student — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aad351 (talk • contribs) 04:33, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: "Kris Herzog" (with the quotes) returned 8,260 Google hits for me. "Kristian Herzog" returned 8,080. Without the quotes 'Kris Herzog' returns 1,700,000 hits - and 'kris herzog spam' returns 888,000. Google search results indicate nothing... AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:05, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Notatility not found in a reliable source. Ariconte (talk) 06:13, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Even taking all stated claims as true, I don't know why we would have an article on him. Would need something notable or newsworthy. Being allegedly employed by someone notable doesn't make one notable. DreamGuy (talk) 20:14, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Fails WP:BASIC requirements of non-trivial coverage in multiple third-party reliable sources. JFHJr (㊟) 20:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not going to lie but i think the author of this article and the subject are the same person. Wikipedia is not a place for promoting publicity. Plus per above.Trongphu (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete - non-notable per WP:BIO and a vanitybio. ukexpat (talk) 15:43, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; tabloid-sourced and unverifiable by our standards. This disgusting dishonesty by the article's creator removes all doubt. (Note that she had previously removed the delete comments.) Antandrus (talk) 01:47, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - speedy if possible Given the actions of the article creator, and given that this looks like a foregone conclusion, I'd suggest that the best thing will be for an admin to step in and close before we have any more trouble? AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:33, 10 January 2012 (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.