Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Salama (2nd nomination)

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. -- Cirt (talk) 17:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Salama

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

A very meritorious person, but probably not suitable for an encyclopedia. Another bio where there are borderline references, but I do not think they show any actual notability. I speedied, but was requested to reconsider, so I'm sending this here for a decision. (The references were not present at the first AfD.) DGG ( talk ) 19:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Judging by the cited sources, Salama is only newsworthy by association with Mark Bingham, not independently notable. Jimmy Pitt talk 22:11, 26 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Delete - Does not meet WP:BIO, none, but one, of the references is about the subject. The one that is, is only his status with the California Bar. There is not even a claim of significance or notability in the article.- McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 00:47, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete article is an off-topic puff-piece about a non-notable person -Drdisque (talk) 00:59, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added in a notability sentence and cited it with an online reference (reference number one). Please let me know if that changes your positions. You guys work fast! Thank you all for your input and integrity to wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sexylamb69 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sorry, but the changes don't persuade me to change my opinion. Much as I agree with the comments about what an admirable person he seems to be, simply saying that he is "noted for" something doesn't establish "notability" in the fairly narrow sense in which Wikipedia uses the term. I see a lot of articles, here and on new pages patrol, where the subject seems a thoroughly admirable individual who undoubtedly deserves more widespread recognition, but that's not Wikipedia's function. Believe me, I take no pleasure from !voting 'Delete' in situations such as this -- there are a lot of pages that I'd love to see disappear first, but the harsh fact is that, whatever our individual opinions, they do meet the community's consensus regarding notability, and this article still doesn't. Jimmy Pitt talk 17:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacking "Significant coverage in reliable sources" - WP:VRS, WP:GNG. Chzz ► 03:18, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article is no longer an orphan.Sexylamb69 (talk) 12:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added in more secondary sources re notability.Sexylamb69 (talk) 12:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your efforts, the issues are none of the references are actually about Mr. Salama or of anything he is directly responsible for. One of the references you posted was in fact just a rehash of another that was already in the article. Being a candidate in a local election does not meet notability either. WP:BIO and WP:Politician are the policies you will need to look at for a chance of inclusion.- McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 13:34, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Mr. Salama sounds like a person we would all like to have as a friend and confidant. However, under our current Notability guideline requirements or any of the sub-guidelines headings listed under Wikipedia:Notability (people) Mr. Salama fails the primary requirements
- 1 The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times.
- 2 The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.

At this point Mr. Salama has obtained neither that I could find in my research. Though the article contains references, they are either blogs – special interest website – or local coverage. Sorry to say, this does not meet our criteria for inclusion. ShoesssS ^Talk 15:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 15:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:41, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, thank you all for your input to date. Salama was just interviewed by the local newspaper - The Marin Independent Journal - for his candidacy for office, and there will be an article written about him in the countywide newspaper in the next two weeks, possibly sooner. Once this comes out, I can add it to this wiki. There are also debates all next week, the results of which are expected to be online. Once they are, I will seek your approval under politician, 3. "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article."" Thank you. Sexylamb69 (talk) 19:28, 29 September 2010 (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.