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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:56, 3 September 2022 (UTC) reply

Berkay Çatak

Berkay Çatak (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)

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

So, almost a year has passed since the final nomination, which ended without a consensus due to the lack of participants, I think it's time take a look at this again. A WP:BEFORE shows that there hasn't been any coverage about him nor the company he founded in the past year, so this will be pretty much a repeat of before.

• Ref 1 is a "Kimdir?" source from a not-so-good looking website (in terms of reliability). There is clear consensus on trwiki that "Kimdir?"s can't be used to establish notability anyway, regardless of publisher, due to their lack of editorial oversight.

• Ref 2 is from a reliable and well known place: Hürriyet. However, it's about a problem with Google and includes a statement of Çatak about the probable cause, which is great and all but isn't independent not significant coverage about Çatak himself.

• I know Daily Sabah of Ref 3 is tagged as unreliable at WP:RSPS, but it's definitely reliable for non-controversial stuff, which this source is. Though content-wise, it is similar to Ref 2, only statements of the subject, and can't be used to establish notability.

• Ref 4 is pretty much the same: reliable, but only includes statements of the subject. Isn't independent nor SIGCOV.

• Ref 5 is reliable, but it's exclusively about Gören Duyan. I don't see much about Çatak himself. He is being introduced as the "16-year-old who created it" and includes his statements on how he made it, but there isn't SIGCOV about him. Since notability is not inherited, this source also doesn't provide anything towards the GNG.

• Ref 6 is exactly the same source, copied word by word, so it can't be treated as a different source (and probably should be removed instead).

• Ref 7 is an interview uploaded to YouTube. Not independent.

• Ref 8 is eh. Briefly introduces him and his projects, then it's full his statements which comprises the majority of the source. I think the introduction can be borderline considered as significant coverage.

• Ref 9 is similar to Ref 5 in terms of content. This time it's a different project, though. In this source, he is only introduced as a "19-year-old entrpreneur", with the rest being fully his statements. No SIGCOV whatsoever.

• WebTekno of Ref 10 is deprecated on the Turkish Wikipedia. In fact, the first to be done so.

• Ref 11 includes a mention of Gören Duyan but no mention of Çatak at all. Isn't SIGCOV.

There is only one source that passes the criteria to establish notability. With this is mind, the subject of the article fails the general notability guideline, and should be deleted. ~Styyx ^Talk? 17:47, 27 August 2022 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Turkey. ~Styyx ^Talk? 17:47, 27 August 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete per sources discussed above, lack of GNG Oaktree b ( talk) 01:12, 28 August 2022 (UTC) reply
• Delete It's pretty obvious that it fails WP:GNG. The detailed explanation by Styyx further reaffirms it. Keivan.f ^Talk 02:16, 28 August 2022 (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.