Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernard Kleiman


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 05:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Bernard Kleiman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable per WP:BIO. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:08, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment 1. The Washington Times obituary described the subject as having "played a key role in bringing the steel industry into compliance with the Civil Rights Act". ( via Highbeam, subscription reqd.). AllyD (talk) 08:16, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment 2. The subject did get decent-length obituaries in media including the NY Times, as shown in the article. However I also notice on the article Talk page that User:Whpq had previously raised concerns about the closeness of the article text to the NY Times obituary, and I would say that this concern remains. So if this article does survive at AfD, it looks like it needs radical change. AllyD (talk) 08:19, 24 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Need to have significant coverage for notability. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 02:47, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Lengthy obituaries in the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette plus numerous newspaper mentions and quotes during the course of his career satisfy WP:GNG. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. The research above demonstrates there is significant coverage from reliable sources concerning Kleiman and his work as an attorney. Coverage from the LA Times, for example, shows its not just routine obits in regional papers. -- Lord Roem (talk) 08:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 21:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I don't understand why this was relisted when clear evidence of notability has been presented. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:31, 31 December 2012 (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.