Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Paul (attorney)

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. Ged UK 14:01, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Paul (attorney)

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

Non-notable American lawyer. No third-party sources that show notability i.e no newspaper articles, books etc. A link to Yellow pages (yelp.com) may be 3rd party but doesn't provide any evidence of notability. Fails WP:BIO. Tassedethe (talk) 18:57, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources that show notability, which have been added to the page "Michael Paul (attorney)"

News12mpaul [Video file]. (2012, July 28). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5CpUe4pFzU#t=0 Michael Paul, Esq in the Media (UPN 9 News) [Video file]. (2009, August 6). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYodK4yvbOc Michael Paul, Esq in the Media (Fox5 News) [Video file]. (2009, August 7). Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph2A4C9y7KU — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mzpascale (talk • contribs) 01:04, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 November 12. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 04:07, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:02, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:02, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:02, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Offered sources just suggest the subject is a lawyer in cases that have gotten some press attention--nothing about the lawyer as opposed to the cases. I find no indications that the subject is notable under our usual standards. --Arxiloxos (talk) 08:05, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per my standards and WP:BARE. A former ADA in one of the largest DA's offices in the nation (The Bronx), he is editor of the Criminal Defense Law Journal, and has appeared as a pundit frequently on NY metro media. Bearian (talk) 22:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 19:02, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 03:47, 29 November 2013 (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.