This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles Ireland Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

You keep stripping out the parts that demonstrate the notability of the person then claiming not notable. Why are you defacing the noteworthy portions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misterpottery (talk • contribs) 12:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A claim that a company is worth $100m (when the claim is ultimately a primary source), does not help notability (e.g WP:GNG) - in fact, the claim will attract concern around WP:PROM. The best way to substantiate the notability for the subject is to insert references to major newspapers/sources talking about Dylan (not his company, or industry). E.g. "On the (date), the (major paper) described (BLP subject) as (something noteworthy)." That is the best route. This article was blanked and redirected previously under a concern, so it is important to improve referencing to what high-quality secondary sources say about the subject himself (not his company, and definitely not when the source of their information is the company itself). When I saw the article first in the page curation system my instincts were to reach for the WP:AfD process, but there is something here there are major news sources used as references. The key making sure you are stating what the source is saying about Dylan, and not about the company or industry. hope this helps and best of luck. Note, I am going to paste this into the Talk Page of this article which is the best place to discuss further. Britishfinance (talk)

Cheers. The prior blanking was done by SisterTwister which was a notorious sock puppet account with a heavy agenda. That account was permanently banned. I will continue to update and do believe I was quoting from noteworthy sources - you deleted citations from NBC News and the Irish Times which are Tier 1 news sources in their respective countries.

Misterpottery (talk) 12:29, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. The best way to combat SPs is to let the facts speak for themselves. Avoid speaking on behalf of the facts, and for BLPs (especially tech ones), put in the text (in " ") that the major news source said about the subject (e.g. On the X Jan the Irish Times described Dyalan as "xyz". That is a very helpful technique for WP:GNG, and any senior editor/admin seeing such a list - speaking directly about the subject - will revert any such blanking, as they will know that it makes a strong case for WP:GNG. If you really want to secure the article, when you are finished updating, consider putting up for WP:AfD (I can do it for you), where a discussion will be had on notability, and if the outcome (which is decided by an administrator - not votes) is to keep, then it is even more secure? kind regards. Britishfinance (talk) 12:39, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]