Knowledge (XXG)

:Articles for deletion/Arnold Jack Rosenthal - Knowledge (XXG)

Source đź“ť

187:. Thanks for the info. I'm still troubled by what's actually listed for references, but if there was something there, then that adds to the case for notability. If the author is reading this, perhaps he can specify those for the reader? Of what's left, there are two sources seem definitely non-trivial: the link to his lawsuit against Oubre (that link wasn't working last night when I tried to check it, so I didn't know what that was), and the newspaper article about his pleading guilty. Not sure what might have been in that prison report (once again in-line citations would certainly be nice). Might have been non-trivial. A couple of other links listed don't seem to be working right now (not sure if that's a temporary situation or not), but maybe some non-trivial info there too if those links become operational. A lot of maybes, but when combined with the two definites already there, I guess that makes for "multiple" non-trivial sources. 245:. I would appeal to the Knowledge (XXG) editors to not delete this biography. As one who utilizes Knowledge (XXG) for research in the field of history and politics (especially localized), I find these biographies to be not only interesting, but invaluable. It is nearly impossible to find such comprehensive information anywhere else online, short of having to go to a library or newspapers in the locality to which the individual is from. Is it not Knowledge (XXG)'s mission to provide such information ? It would be highly shortsighted to remove these biographies. 275:
find it easier to get articles or borderline figures like this guy accepted in WP if they were written more concisely. That isn't (at the moment) a specific guideline, but it's part of what is meant by being encyclopedic--an encyclopedia has articles whose length depends on the subjects' importance (and also of course of the amount of material, but this is never a problem with your articles).
171:' there are technically enough sources. "Review of the ..." apparently means that it was examined for those dates, and an item or two actually found. Only the items found, of course are sources. This is like saying one searched Google. Google isn't a source, what one finds there are sources. I've edited the article accordingly. 274:
Actually, Billy, it is not WPs mission to produce articles about everybody interesting, or everything not covered by other online sources. A full encyclopedia of state politics might find a good home in Wikia. The standard is Notability to the reader. Some politicians are, some aren't. But you might
213:
He lost the race for mayor & legislature. I am an inclusionist about politicians, and think people losing races for national office are notable. Not state office. His crime also was nothing particularly dramatic.If kept, the article will of course be edited to an appropriate length and amount of
146:
a chance to more clearly specifiy the references to allow for a more clear determination regarding notability. Given the track record, I am perhaps not optimistic that this will be done and actually establish notability, but just to be completely fair, I think the opportunity should be offered. If
228:
I see I have !voted three different ways with 5 hours. I consider this to indicate not my carelessness, but rather the truly borderline nature of this subject. In borderline situations I think the general way of going is considered to be keep. as the article develops, or fails to develop, we can
138:
actually be multiple sources. But with the references not being in-line and with such references as "review or articles from 1973-1977", it's tough to evaluate their merit. For
110: 83: 78: 87: 70: 264: 17: 199:
At least a personal interview with Billy wasn's used as an interview this time. He seems to have enough regional notability.
298: 36: 281: 235: 220: 203: 191: 178: 155: 125: 52: 74: 297:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
260: 117:
Subject is non-notable local politician with two failed runs for office and some local scandal to his name.
252: 66: 58: 256: 143: 122: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
200: 118: 49: 104: 188: 152: 277: 231: 216: 174: 291:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
100: 96: 92: 39:). No further edits should be made to this page. 301:). No further edits should be made to this page. 8: 134:. OK, so for this one it seems like there 18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion 7: 229:always discuss the article again. 24: 1: 249:D.J. Jones -- 30 March 2007 318: 236:22:12, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 221:05:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 204:03:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 192:02:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 179:00:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 156:07:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC) 147:that doesn't happen, then 126:05:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC) 282:04:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC) 53:06:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 294:Please do not modify it. 142:one, I'd suggest giving 32:Please do not modify it. 255:comment was added by 67:Arnold Jack Rosenthal 59:Arnold Jack Rosenthal 268: 309: 296: 250: 108: 90: 34: 317: 316: 312: 311: 310: 308: 307: 306: 305: 299:deletion review 292: 251:—The preceding 197:Very weak keep. 81: 65: 62: 44:The result was 37:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 315: 313: 304: 303: 287: 286: 285: 284: 247: 246: 239: 238: 223: 206: 194: 182: 158: 115: 114: 61: 56: 42: 41: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 314: 302: 300: 295: 289: 288: 283: 280: 279: 273: 272: 271: 270: 269: 266: 262: 258: 257:Billy Hathorn 254: 244: 241: 240: 237: 234: 233: 227: 224: 222: 219: 218: 212: 211: 207: 205: 202: 198: 195: 193: 190: 186: 183: 181: 180: 177: 176: 170: 169: 164: 163: 159: 157: 154: 150: 145: 144:Billy Hathorn 141: 137: 133: 130: 129: 128: 127: 124: 120: 112: 106: 102: 98: 94: 89: 85: 80: 76: 72: 68: 64: 63: 60: 57: 55: 54: 51: 47: 40: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 293: 290: 276: 248: 242: 230: 225: 215: 209: 208: 196: 184: 173: 172: 167: 166: 161: 160: 148: 139: 135: 131: 116: 45: 43: 31: 28: 201:Realkyhick 226:Undecided 185:Weak keep 168:Weak Keep 265:contribs 253:unsigned 214:detail. 119:Dhartung 111:View log 132:Comment 84:protect 79:history 50:Shimeru 210:Delete 189:Mwelch 153:Mwelch 149:delete 88:delete 136:might 105:views 97:watch 93:links 16:< 261:talk 243:Keep 162:Keep 140:this 123:Talk 101:logs 75:talk 71:edit 46:Keep 278:DGG 232:DGG 217:DGG 175:DGG 165:. ' 151:. 109:– ( 267:). 263:• 121:| 103:| 99:| 95:| 91:| 86:| 82:| 77:| 73:| 48:. 259:( 113:) 107:) 69:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
deletion review
Shimeru
06:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Arnold Jack Rosenthal
Arnold Jack Rosenthal
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Dhartung
Talk
05:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Billy Hathorn
Mwelch
07:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
DGG
00:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Mwelch
02:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Realkyhick
03:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
DGG
05:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑