Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Bromberg


 * 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   no consensus. J04n(talk page) 11:57, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Andrew Bromberg

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to fail WP:CREATIVE. Notwithstanding Bromberg's achievements and credited lead involvement in a number of projects, notability is not inherited. I found the following references, but they don't appear to confer notability, (possibly it's WP:TOOSOON). The previous deletion of is noted for information. I wish you all the best in your endeavours, Mr Bromberg. -- Trevj (talk) 12:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. 13:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC) -- Trevj (talk) 13:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. Under external links a couple of books are listed, which appear to be bona fide publications from independent publishers (at least, the Amazon listings look that way), although under the aegis of Aedas (try saying that fast 3 times)  so maybe not really independent.  There's also a few hits at GNews including this one.  He does seem to be a serious player.  If kept, the article would certainly need to be edited drastically to remove the promotional tone. --Arxiloxos (talk) 18:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Call me a cynic, but it looks as if his employers have an effective marketing/PR department. -- Trevj (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Designing a notable or widely written-about building would seem to meet WP:CREATIVE #4 (WP:CREATIVE explicitly includes architects). He seems to be the designer of Pentominium, which is a significant and widely-discussed building. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:42, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean, in which case that leads to a couple of questions:
 * Is Pentominium (or any of the subject's other works) the subject of ... multiple independent periodical articles or reviews? (The refs in that article look to be fairly routine news coverage.)
 * WP:BIO states People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. Notability is not inherited, so how can an article about the creator of the work(s) be viable when its contents concerning the subject (rather than his works) seem not to be sourceable to independent reliable sources and are therefore not verifiable, per WP:BLP?
 * -- Trevj (talk) 12:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 20:39, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 20:39, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 20:39, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:40, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 12:22, 31 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Now listed at WT:BIO too. -- Trevj (talk) 13:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 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.