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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Ehrsam[edit]

[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)

Another possible paid PR. Not notable outside of company, fails to establish notability as an individual. All of his news coverage are primarily for the company. Meeanaya (talk) 05:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Meeanaya (talk) 05:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Meeanaya (talk) 05:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a non-notable businessman. Wikipedia is not who's who, one does not pay their way to an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:16, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep there is clearly enough in depth coverage of this gentleman to pass the WP:GNG threshold. The Forbes, Fortune and Wall Street Journal coverage is enough to cover that threshold on their own. The coverage does not need to only about the subject but should cover them in some depth, which these do. As much as this looks like it may have been written by a paid editor there is still enough to pass and be kept. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 06:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Forbes article is written by contributor, so not a Reliable reference, Fortune is an interview, Wall Street Journal is not an in-depth coverage for him. The problem lies here Fred Ehrsam is not indepedentally notable outside of his company coinbase. Merge to Coinbase, could be a better option if it is not delete. Meeanaya (talk) 11:34, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep agree with Mcmatter. 65.18.120.111 (talk) 09:24, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge to Coinbase - coverage appears passing and PR-originated - David Gerard (talk) 13:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Looks paid. The refs don't indicate notability. Szzuk (talk) 18:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - doesn't seem to have any inherent notability per WP:PERSON - only notable because of association with the company - the article references mention him in passing, he is not the subject - therefore, delete - Epinoia (talk) 00:10, 17 August 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.