Talk:Bryan Leach
Add topic| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Moved draft
[edit]There is a draft of this page. It was submitted, accidentally denied per the reviewing editor and moved to this redirect to publish. Publishing the draft wouldn't work since this redirect already existed anyway. Flyguyz93 (talk) 20:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Questioning independent notability under WP:GNG/WP:BIO
[edit]I have concerns that this article does not meet Wikipedia’s notability standards for a stand-alone biography. Nearly all of the coverage cited here is tied directly to Ibotta’s business operations, funding rounds, and IPO. Major outlets such as WSJ, Bloomberg, TechCrunch, and Forbes mention Bryan Leach primarily in the context of reporting on Ibotta, not in independent, in-depth profiles of him as an individual. Awards such as Ernst & Young’s regional Entrepreneur of the Year and Glassdoor’s “Top CEOs” lists are routine business recognitions and do not in themselves establish notability. The article’s emphasis on his education, board service, and philanthropy also appears sourced from local press and institutional communications, which further suggests promotional slant rather than broad, independent coverage. Taken together, the sourcing does not demonstrate the kind of significant, sustained, and independent attention required under WP:GNG, WP:BIO, or WP:CORP. The article currently reads more like a promotional biography than an encyclopedic entry about a subject with enduring notability. 185.159.5.122 (talk) 17:46, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Community involvement section proposed for removal
[edit]This section is the most egregiously self promotional, and while I feel that this entire article should be removed, I think this section lends itself to being removed as a top priority. Terareconinc (talk) 06:26, 5 September 2025 (UTC)