Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harrison Greenbaum

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. The Globe confirms his existence, but doesn't write about him in a way that would allow us to source a biography. The Crimson is RS but not sufficient to establish notability. -- Y not? 00:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Harrison Greenbaum[edit]

Does not appear to meet WP:BIO, claims to fame include the publication of one of his essays in a concatenated work and founding of a weekly comedy show whose notability is also questioned. No WP:RS outside of local interest, art scene, etc. type articles and a few mentions in the Harvard Crimson for his activities as an undergraduate... nothing really "non-trivial". Previously deleted as an A7, but appears to have been recreated after unprotection. Previous version was WP:COI, but attempting to assume good faith that the creator is not the same person as the subject of the article. Delete. Kinu ^t/_c 00:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also added Don't Touch the Foot to this AfD, as the articles seem to prop one another up. --Kinu ^t/_c 02:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But Harvard Crimson is recognized as a RS, as is Boston Globe. Also, he is the author of several MAD Magazine articles (found site sourcing this: tomrichmond.com/blog). All of these combined seemed to meet WP:BIO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.56.54 (talk) 02:00, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Greenbaum, Merge "Don't touch... notability for the show is undemonstrated--the Time Out New York references is a mere listing , not a feature as claimed in the WP article, & is not referred to by name in the Boston Globe. Greenbaum, tho, has done a variety of things and seems the more notable. certainly not worth two articles.DGG (talk) 02:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually think it's worth keeping both articles. The Boston Comedy Festival (bostoncomedyfestival.com) is a legitimate comedy festival, as is New York Underground Comedy Festival; if both of these festivals featured Harrison Greenbaum and/or Don't Touch the Foot (as the sources note they did) then I see no reason for the articles to be deleted. The Boston Globe article is also clearly about Don't Touch the Foot, as it references a "Times Square show founded by Harrison Greenbaum and David Ingber," which is clarified by the second reference for that sentence. Time Out New York Magazine is also one of the pre-eminent sources of theater listings; if a show is listed there, it's clearly notable. Also, the fact that this comedy show has run for more than 30 weeks (as per the website), lists many notable comedians in its roster, and is in the middle of Time Square points to its legitimacy. Though the two seem to prop each other up (good call, Kinu) both seem to meet the notability requirements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.56.54 (talk) 03:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. It's minor performer whose big claim is to what amounts to a weekly nightclub show. And no, a mere listing in a city magazine's entertainment section is NOT in any way, shape, or form evidence of notability, nor is being one of dozens of performers at a comedy festival. --Calton | Talk 05:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The sources don't provide evidence of notability for either Greebaum or the 'Don't Touch the Foot' event. From reading them, it looks like there could possibly be room for an article on the Harvard Stand-Up Comedy Society itself, but this person and event are just too minor to deserve articles. Terraxos (talk) 05:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a section devoted to MAD Magazine writers and Harrison Greenbaum is clearly one. Also, while being a performer in a show in a major comedy festival may not meet notability requirements, actually producing a show in two major comedy festivals lends credibility. I think everything combined - authorship in a book, writing for a national magazine, performing for the Mystery Lounge (which nobody has mentioned yet - I looked at the site and it seems quite a major magic show in Boston, having been featured on national TV and the like), and founding a stand-up comedy society at Harvard - seem to be evidence that the article shouldn't be deleted. Also, the listing of national headliners at Don't Touch the Foot definitely adds to its credibility. It seems to be a real comedy venue in New York, as verified by the myriad sources included in the article, so should be included. I would support, perhaps, cutting down the two articles, but not deleting them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.11.14 (talk) 07:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. While the Harvard Crimson might be reliable, it's certainly not independent, especially since the information in the article seems to come from the troupe itself. The rest is passing mentions and primary sources. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 12:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Harvard Crimson is a recognized RS; if it's printing information it received from the troupe it is only after it has been verified. In other words, because it is an RS, we can trust that information in it is well-researched, verifiable, and true. Also, while the "passing mentions" on their own may not have been enough, combined it seems to indicate some kind of legitimacy. Mentions in the Boston Globe are significant, as is participation in the Boston Comedy Festival and the New York Underground Comedy Festival. I would support, as previously suggested here, that the articles are shortened a bit, but would definitely not support deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.56.54 (talk) 05:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - I actually agree. Don't Touch the Foot is a show in Times Square that features famous comedians; Harrison Greenbaum is the creator of that show (along with a lot of other things, like founding the Comedy Society and writing for Mad Magazine). Both seem notable enough to me. Additionally, the references seem to check out and, together, make a pretty verifiable case for the notability of these two subjects. I'm for keeping the articles, too.

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.