Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simcha Weinstein

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 keep. L Faraone 18:15, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Simcha Weinstein

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

No notability is provided WP:BLP. His books especially fail to meet notability, no information about publisher, no information about how many books were sold, no mention of his book on reliable sources whatsoever (the only source for these books is his own personal site, such sites as amazon hardly can be asserted for notability). There are thousands of professors who are chairs of specific Religious/other Affairs Committee, and they also may publish books not as much for commercial purpose but for author's (own) interest. Keeping this article which obviously fails notability would be unfair in regard to other non-notable writers. That's why no one must be beyond the law, to also keep it with respect to fairness. Drimidiri (talk) 09:43, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete A rabbi who wrote some books. About that we should be excited? EEng (talk) 11:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. some links on WP right now, his work is cited here. He is mentioned in at least one scholarly work, The Jewish Graphic Novel, google books citation, 29 hits on google books, some of them significant to my reading of them. 476 hits using google. one recent news hit, [1], indicates some notability in relation to the Pratt Institute, which is buried in the article and unsourced. google news brings 84 entries, with this New York Times mention, [2]. I know that google hits dont in and of themselves show notability, but perusing them shows he has some notability beyond, say, the chasidic world or the comic book world. in other words "so, you want us to NOT get excited by a Jew who wrote a book? Is the Jahwist chicken liver? oy vey, the chutzpah of some schmegegges:)" (seriously, i do respect (but disagree with) the argument for deletion, and am just having fun at the end there, but i think the deletion needs to refute at least some of what ive found.)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:57, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh vey! You must be meshugana! Please review WP:AUTHOR and explain how the subject qualifies. Of what's listed there, the following criteria are the only ones I can see even possibly applying:

The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
The person's work...has won significant critical attention...

The question is: what is significant critical attention... what qualifies as widely cited... etc? I'm open, but you'll have to come up with more than one mention in a book and an NYT piece (which discussed numerous works, of which Weinstein's was only one). EEng (talk) 03:46, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the new york times piece is primarily about weinstein, with mentions of some others. however, i of course agree that one citation does not notability make. here he is in USA today commenting on a version of the old testament by r crumb: [3], miami herald, ottowa citizen, writing for the jerusalem post, seattle times, review (with 3 other books), by a professor and director of The Hebrew Hammer, notability within the Chabad movement and in association with the pratt institute. I dont think we can look at his notability within the world as a whole, but specifically within the world of Jewish orthodox culture. he is a celebrity within that world, a link between their goals and secular jewish culture. this is a huge topic within the jewish community, and that community is highly notable. I of course admit hes not THAT notable, and his publishing company is not exactly doubleday, but barricade books is not a fly by night publisher. his article, and the articles on his books, could probably be merged, with more facts on the books included (like publisher and pub dates, etc), and some of his biographical material trimmed back (seems excessive), but I believe the refs provided show that his 2 books show notability to belong here. However, i will bow to consensus here.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:14, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. NYT article plus assorted other coverage makes him notable enough to pass WP:GNG. I agree that the separate book pages should be merged back into the author page.--Arxiloxos (talk) 18:26, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail" Here we see a slight mentioning among other authors in NYT online site. And also read WP:AUTHOR:

The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
The person's work...has won significant critical attention...

He, unfortunately, doesn't pass none of it. Drimidiri (talk) 14:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the coverage already cited by Mercurywoodrose, I find plenty of other coverage of Weinstein. A Google News archives search turns up articles and reviews in such publications as the Chicago Tribune[4], Houston Chronicle[5], Arizona Daily Star[6], Miami Herald[7], Arutz Sheva[8], Terra Networks in Argentina[9], La Stampa in Italy[10], and on CNN [11]. He easily passes WP:GNG.--Arxiloxos (talk) 16:11, 15 December 2010 (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.