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.
I've been cleaning up this article from
this version but the more I look at the sources, the less convinced I've become that the subject meets
WP:BIO. He was clearly not notable at the
first AFD in 2007 and the
second in 2011 closed as redirect to
Petra Ecclestone per
WP:NOTINHERITED. There has been further coverage since then, but the only substantial coverage has been in The Daily Mail[1][2][3][4] which quite rightly is not an ideal source for BLPs and those sources contain almost zero encyclopedic information. They've repeatedly called him a billionaire, but I'm unable to find any mention of him in either the Forbes or Sunday Times rich lists and a (very short)
FT blog called him a "reputed billionaire". If the Daily Mail can't check such a simple fact then there is little hope for the reliability of other information in the articles. I've searched in
Factiva and google news but haven't turned up any other coverage about him other than brief snippets such as
[5]. There were also mentions in relation to an art deal as well
[6][7][8] but the subject of those is the painting rather than Stunt and none provide any biographical information. Apologies for the length of the nom, but unless there is something that I've missed I think that we should reinstate the redirect to
Petra Ecclestone.
SmartSE (
talk)
23:16, 1 December 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Khocon: - I've already addressed most of those sources in the nomination and explained why I don't think that they are sufficient to establish notability. The Apollo magazine is the only new one, but once again the coverage is brief. You haven't explained why my line of reasoning is incorrect.
SmartSE (
talk)
12:07, 5 December 2015 (UTC)reply
@
Smartse: - I hope, you will get better explanations from other volunteers. Let's see. It's not between you and me.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Khocon (
talk •
contribs) 04:23, 6 December 2015
Comment@
Jonesey95: It's not fair, why should we create a section about James Stunts's art purchases details on his Wife's Wiki page?. Don't you think, James Stunt is notable?
Khocon (
talk)
06:16, 10 December 2015 (UTC)reply
No, I do not think he is notable on his own, according to the sources that we have been able to find. Of the sources in the current version in the article, they are either Daily Mail and OK!, which are paparazzi junk; articles about his wife; articles about an art purchase that he didn't make; web pages on sites that do not appear to be RS (e.g. Business Rich and Celebrity Family); and a driving.co.uk piece and an FT blog piece that are trivial mentions of his cars. All hat, no cattle. –
Jonesey95 (
talk)
06:32, 10 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Redirect to Petra Ecclestone seems to be the best solution. The slimness of the coverage doesn't provide notability under our guidelines. --
Bejnar (
talk)
21:25, 13 December 2015 (UTC)reply
CommentRayman60 is a fresh meat. I'm wondering why this article got "Keep" votes?. James Stunt clearly a notable subject for Wiki. Technically it's a 4th AFD, this article was restored per a consensus
All public logs. My fellow volunteers are repeatedly voting Redirect to Petra Ecclestone without any discussion and research. Thanks for your efforts guys! -
Khocon (
talk)
18:24, 14 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete - this is clearly somebody who has fame through association and not in his own right,. I see zero notability here especially because notability is not inherited, in this case from his partner. Merge , if you must, with the article on his wife, but on the basis of the evidence to date, deletion seems to be the right choice. VelellaVelella Talk 19:02, 14 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Comment: No opinion on the deletion nomination, but I just thought I would mention I was
canvassed here by Khocon
[9]. I seem to be one of many users they've invited to participate.
Ks0stm(
T•
C•
G•
E)20:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Weak Keep: although much of the content out there appears to be weak with gossip-related comments, there is quite a lot out there that indicates that he is notable to a large group of people globally. Although one can argue that some of the sources aren't reliable secondary sources, it would lead one to wonder why so many of them write articles about Mr. Stunt. Furthermore, according to
WP:BASIC, "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." With that said, I suggest that we keep the article. By the way, I too was canvassed here by
User:Khocon on my
talk page.
Hermera34 (
talk)
20:58, 14 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Redirect to Petra Ecclestone - Although irrelevant to this discussion, I was also one of the many users canvassed by Khocon. I personally agree with the sound arguments to redirect to Petra Ecclestone.
JQTriple7talk21:04, 14 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Redirect to Petra Ecclestone - same as JQTriple and Ks0stm, I was canvassed by Khocon. I don't see anything in here which details why he's notable. He's a freakin' billionaire and the best you can do on how he got his money is one short sentence?!?? At least the article for Petra seems to have more heft (albeit not much more...). Redirect for now.
Tabercil (
talk)
00:13, 15 December 2015 (UTC)reply
I was taklpage notified by Khocon. I've deliberately not read above to learn which way s/he leans. My immediate impression is "mild keep".
Tony(talk) 04:30, 15 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete, how bad can it be if the 'article' isn't even capable of making you understand what this person should be known for, or what he does for a living. No encyclopedical value whatsoever. --
Midas02 (
talk)
18:28, 15 December 2015 (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.