- 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The result was speedy keep, withdrawn by nominator and no outstanding delete !votes. ( non-admin closure) Everymorning talk 01:49, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Harvey Thomas Strosberg
- Harvey Thomas Strosberg ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nothing unusual about Strosberg, he's just a typical successful Canadian lawyer. None of the articles cited are about Strosberg himself. This article seems to be an ad for him. mikeman67 ( talk) 21:43, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Withdrawn by nominator - based on the comments by the editors below, and additional sources that were highlighted, I'm withdrawing the nomination. I think the page badly needs a cleanup still. Part of my reasoning was that the page creator has a history of creating advert-like pages for Canadian lawyers, but on further review I think Strosberg meets the notability guidelines. I see someone removed the WP:Peacock tag, which I think was premature, since there's still lines like this on the page, without citation: "Strosberg has been partners with some of the most accomplished lawyers in Canada" and "Strosberg's work as a civil litigator has been widely recognized in the form of honorary degrees and medals." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeman67 ( talk • contribs) 20:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 21:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Strong Keep The National Post has described him as "one of the best known civil litigators in Canada" [1] and there is clearly enough RS coverage of him to meet WP:BIO. This includes, but is not limited to, the following sources: [2] [3] [4] Everymorning talk 21:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Good sources, definitely notable. —Мандичка YO 😜 22:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: Easily meets WP:BASIC. Two more sources that mention this lawyer: [5] [6]. Notability is not based on how special the subject is: it is based on coverage from reliable sources independent of the subject. Esquivalience t 23:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Keep – Upon a source review, the subject passes WP:BASIC. NORTH AMERICA 1000 13:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:48, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:48, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 speedy keep, withdrawn by nominator and no outstanding delete !votes. ( non-admin closure) Everymorning talk 01:49, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Harvey Thomas Strosberg
- Harvey Thomas Strosberg ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nothing unusual about Strosberg, he's just a typical successful Canadian lawyer. None of the articles cited are about Strosberg himself. This article seems to be an ad for him. mikeman67 ( talk) 21:43, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Withdrawn by nominator - based on the comments by the editors below, and additional sources that were highlighted, I'm withdrawing the nomination. I think the page badly needs a cleanup still. Part of my reasoning was that the page creator has a history of creating advert-like pages for Canadian lawyers, but on further review I think Strosberg meets the notability guidelines. I see someone removed the WP:Peacock tag, which I think was premature, since there's still lines like this on the page, without citation: "Strosberg has been partners with some of the most accomplished lawyers in Canada" and "Strosberg's work as a civil litigator has been widely recognized in the form of honorary degrees and medals." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeman67 ( talk • contribs) 20:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 21:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Strong Keep The National Post has described him as "one of the best known civil litigators in Canada" [1] and there is clearly enough RS coverage of him to meet WP:BIO. This includes, but is not limited to, the following sources: [2] [3] [4] Everymorning talk 21:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Good sources, definitely notable. —Мандичка YO 😜 22:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: Easily meets WP:BASIC. Two more sources that mention this lawyer: [5] [6]. Notability is not based on how special the subject is: it is based on coverage from reliable sources independent of the subject. Esquivalience t 23:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- Keep – Upon a source review, the subject passes WP:BASIC. NORTH AMERICA 1000 13:29, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:48, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:48, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
- 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.