Talk:Jay Friedman

Untitled
Sounds like someone who could possibly be notable. Placed the hangon on top of someone elses DB in order to give Kurt a chance to add more. Avruch Talk 00:53, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion
This article was AfD'd some time ago (I have no idea why the link is not here). Since then, it has not been improved in any way. Rather than immediately AfD it again, I am going to ask what, if anything, people intend to do to improve this article (ie put in some reliable sources or other demonstrations of notability). --Cheeser1 (talk) 08:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * (1) Reliable sources are already present; (2) Notability is irrelevant; (3) The prior AfD wasn't a "no-consensus, defaults to keep" but a CLEAR consensus keep, so what the hell would make you think anything has changed? (4) That you think an article needs "improvement" is no reason to threaten to delete it--we're not on a deadline. When--and if--I get around to it I might work on it, or others might come along in the future and do it themselves.  Why are you so eager to delete it?  Kurt Weber ( Go Colts! ) 16:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Kurt, your incivility is intolerable. I will not engage in this discussion if you will not do so in good faith. Good day, sir. --Cheeser1 (talk) 16:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please show me this supposed "incivility". Kurt Weber ( Go Colts! ) 17:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If you deny it, I will ignore it and address your points: (1) No reliable independent sources given. One unreliable one, one non-independent one, neither of which constitutes significant coverage. (2) Notability is irrelevant? Since when? (3) The prior AfD was a "keep" on the basis and provision of future expansion. I'm not demolishing the house while it's being built. I'm asking you to take this stray 2 by 4 back to the store until such time as someone can build a house out with it. (4) I'm not even going to dignify this item with a response. --Cheeser1 (talk) 18:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * FWIW, I would support the deletion of this article. Its a short one liner and in my opinion would fall under WP:BIO.  D u s t i talk to me 16:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Would anyone else like to comment on this issue? Does anyone who participated in the AfD have further explanation as to their rationales? I'm particularly interested in several of you who voted "keep" under the rationales like this article could be encyclopedic, it could be expanded, or the subject might be demonstrably notable. --Cheeser1 (talk) 21:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)