Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brad Friedman

Brad Friedman

Brad Friedman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

WP:BIO, and perhaps autobio of freelance journalist--most edits come from IP addresses. The lead calls him a "self-described" etc. etc., and self-described is what all of the footnotes in the article are. Lots of wikipuffery, zero substantial coverage in independent third-party sources, and the desperation in linking to blog posts and the like suggests there is none to be had; I didn't find any, though it's hard searching through all the false hits to Brad Friedmans out there. THF (talk) 23:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete, While there is an assertion of notability, it's reading more of a resume. In particular, only one reference seems to be independent, and it's more of minutes for a meeting rather than news coverage. The best notability assertion is with Brad Friedman: Blog Bio & Testimonials..., where it at least lists quotes from other people (but not reference them.) --Sigma 7 (talk) 22:41, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
• Delete: Clearly the notability bar for "Creative professionals" is high and not reached by Friedman. Lot's of quotes from CourtTV don't make it a notable article. 12.3.62.130 (talk) 14:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

---

This debate was originally closed as "delete" and reconsidered at deletion review. Result was to relist to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Chick Bowen 00:33, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete non notable, per WP:CREATIVE §hawnpoo 06:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. Added sources not only easily satisfy the general notability guideline, which has primacy, but demonstrate that the subject is regarded as an important voting rights blogger who is often cited by his peers, hence WP:CREATIVE is satisfied. Baileypalblue (talk) 07:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment. You might want to identify the three or four cites that you feel best show notability: out of the first two I randomly spot-checked, one was a blog, and the other was WP:LARD that barely mentioned Friedman, which doesn't give me faith that all those footnotes are real. THF (talk) 07:28, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete Edits aren't going to make someone notable. WP's got a high standard here and it's very clearly not met. This doesn't appear to me to be a question of article quality. 71.178.193.134 (talk) 08:31, 8 March 2009 (UTC)