Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spencer Kuvin (3rd nomination)

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. Tone 18:31, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spencer Kuvin

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Spencer Kuvin
• Articles for deletion/Spencer Kuvin (2nd nomination)
• Articles for deletion/Spencer Kuvin (3rd nomination)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Spencer Kuvin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Independent coverage appears to be limited to quotes in the context of cases that he's worked on. I was unable to find significant, independent secondary coverage in reliable sources, although some unreliable tabloids do have some coverage. Doesn't appear to meet WP:GNG. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep delete keep There seem to be many, many reports involving Kuvin, and he is often used as both an expert and player in these articles. This coverage is wide, though shallow. I suspect a reasonable article could be built by scrounging through for details (which vary story-to-story). Kuvin seems to have maintained this minor role in from 2009 to 2019[1] to 2020. Jlevi (talk) 02:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC) Edit: Nonetheless, this doesn't satisfy any notability guideline that I am aware of. This could probably be merged to some appropriate page. Jlevi (talk) 02:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC) And back to keep: 13:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep There are many sources on Kuvin and is a notable lawyer. I also can't think of a page that this this content could be merged to. ~ HAL333 14:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you point to the 2 or 3 strongest? Perhaps I'm just not seeing them among the flood of passing mentions. Jlevi (talk) 14:27, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jlevi The main caveat is that they are most are in the context of the Epstein scandal:

• One on one interview with NPR [2]
• Article's main focus is a bold question by Kuvin [3]
• This nypost article discusses his Maxwell prediction [4]
• A Mother Jones article which mostly relies on quotes from Kuvin [5]

I'll try incorporating these into the article. I've also added a few more to the article. ~ HAL333 18:17, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I buy it. Jlevi (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2020 (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.