Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvey Silbert

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 article returned to userspace. (non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:12, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Harvey Silbert

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

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. While the subject have been mentioned in passing in (mostly local) media, which the creator skillfully combined into an otherwise impressive biography, there are only two sources about the person, both obituaries. One from Variety, which is certainly a reliable source, but it is short and does not differ from much from obituaries of that person which are clearly identified as paid for (ex. [1]). The second obituary is a bit more extensive, through it also seems like a rewritten version of the paid-for ones, and comes from a local newspaper and as such is not seen as sufficient for notability (see Wikipedia:Notability/Noticeboard/Archive_1#Obituaries for a related discussion). I had to think hard about this, there are also numerous mentions in the books - but all are in passing, at best defining him in several sentences (the best one I found is here: Gus Russo (12 December 2008). Supermob: How Sidney Korshak and His Criminal Associates Became America's Hidden Power Brokers. Bloomsbury Publishing. p. 13. ISBN 978-1-59691-898-6.), something to be expected as the subject has been identified as a personal lawyer to several notable figures, and so often makes an appearences in biographies about them or such, but notability is not inherited, and his philanthropic activities, while certainly laudable, have not generated any in-depth coverage. A non-notable university award was named after him, and perhaps some buildings/etc., but please note that mentions in passing, whether on Google or in newspapers or books, are not sufficient for being notable. In other words, nothing here seems to be a match for NBIO. Of course, I'd be happy to consider arguments to the contrary. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:41, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's now in userspace. Piotrus, please stop watching my contributions and trying to get every new referenced article I create deleted. FORGET ME.Zigzig20s (talk) 13:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:11, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:11, 4 September 2016 (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.