Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian R. Morgenstern


 * 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 delete. This is certainly not unanimous, but there is clear consensus that GNG is not met, nor NPOL. That said, it would certainly be possible to build an encyclopedic article about an individual where multiple reliable sources discuss, in-depth, that person's performance within a particular job. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 18:44, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Brian R. Morgenstern

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A deputy press secretary is a minor appointed position, and fails both NPOL and GNG. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Individual who served in a significant White House position meets WP:GNG. KidAd   talk  00:27, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Please note that the above editor is the creator of the nominated article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:51, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep The office of Deputy Press Secretary is a top White House aide being part of leadership of White House Communications, the office is second only to the Press Secretary. Yeungkahchun (talk) 00:44, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * A deputy press secretary is not a "significant White House position" nor a "top White House aide", they're basically a well-paid, high-profile flunky who is a direct hire by the President or their Chief of Staff and servers at their pleasure. They're not elected, or even, really, "appointed", they're just hired.  They may think of themselves as important because their name gets into the press, but that's just because they're a conduit for information from the Preisdent.  They don;t have any real importance in and of themselves.More to the point, please read WP:NPOL and tell us what part of it they fulfill.  As Cullen328 just posted at Articles for deletion/Sarah A. Matthews: "This guideline does not apply to appointed legislative aides or White House aides or their equivalents in other countries. In 13+ years of editing, I have never seen this guideline applied this way." Beyond My Ken (talk) 00:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG – there is no significant coverage of the person outside of the press release-style article in Politico. (Hard not to notice that 8 of the 20 refs are just about Trump's COVID test results.) There's an interview in the purview of his job as deputy press secretary, and the rest are brief mentions/quotes and standard bio sheets. Schazjmd   (talk)  01:00, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. The refs are really passing mentions that derive from his job (eg WP:MILL for a deputy press secretary).  Don’t see any WP:SIGCOV by a quality RS on him as the main subject.  For BLPs going for GNG, you need at least one good SIGCOV. Britishfinance (talk) 01:39, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete minor position, no significant coverage in RS found during my search. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  02:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per nom. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. - Aoidh (talk) 06:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I've reviewed the sources Morbidthoughts shared below, and they don't meet WP:GNG's criteria of significant coverage. The Politico one is iffy, but that's the only one that comes close. - Aoidh (talk) 20:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - Previous Deputy Press Secretaries had articles to their name, so precedent tells us that we should keep this one too ProbablyNovarian (talk) 11:11, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. As the position itself is not notable per WP:NPOL, they have had to meet WP:GNG, but this BLP does not seem to meet that. Britishfinance (talk) 12:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. Having gone through the sources, they are just WP:MILL (i.e. passing mentions consistent with his job); I could find no independent quality RS doing a WP:SIGCOV piece on him as the subject. A case of his Wikipedia article being a major part of his notability, whereas it should be the other way around. Britishfinance (talk) 12:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. If you have out the last 10 refs that deal with his refusal, in his job as dep press secretary, to answer questions on Trump's coronavirus infection situation, there is really nothing in this BLP. Britishfinance (talk) 12:15, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above — fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL — not a member of a legislative body, neither elected nor confirmed cabinet appointment. No significant publications by him. No significant publications about him. The biggest mention in an independent article is about a blog post referring to the "United States of Gaymeria." Not sufficiently notorious, although I'm sure he'll do more such things in the future. Tiny number of ghits, so never made much impact in any of his prior positions either. As a lawyer, only 2 caselaw mentions. Heck, I've got more, and I'm not a lawyer. (But I've taken cases as a plaintiff or defendant as far as the state supreme court and the US 6th Circuit.) So far in his life, he's a nothingburger.
 * Keep - per GNG because there is significant coverage in RS of him. Morbidthoughts (talk) 06:47, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, there is no real "significant" coverage at all, simply passing coverage, as Britishfinance pointed out above. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:07, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * These refs are all WP:MILL references to him doing his job (and mainly defending the administration on COVID on television). There is no quality independent RS that I could find that has done a specific piece on him (i.e. WP:SIGCOV), as a notable person. There are thousands of journalists/media people who would produce these kinds of refs, but they don't get Wikipedia BLPs unless they have refs specifically on them as subjects of note (i.e. a notable journalist/media person). Britishfinance (talk) 15:12, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh please; with the "real" or "passing" coverage arguments. Significant coverage is reached when the source addresses the subject directly and in detail; not when it reaches a level of importance or non-routine for you. That Politico article is a specific piece about him and articles about how he does his job all contribute to WP:BASIC. Morbidthoughts (talk) 17:04, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The first ref from Politico is a press release from the Whitehouse on his appointment and the other four refs are him speaking (as deputy press secretary) on COVID. I could take any midwest Cable TV weather forecaster who would have exactly the same refs (i.e. an RS noting their appointment, and loads of TV interviews on them talking about the weather); but that is WP:MILL. There is no decent RS that I can see that has ever done even a partial interview on the subject.  WP:BASIC is when you have lots of pieces mentioning you (as the subject) but no in-depth pieces (i.e. WP:SIGCOV).  The Meena Harris AfD, is a classic BASIC.  The Politico piece could be a BASIC ref (although not a great one), but you need more of them.  The other refs are WP:MILL and not BASIC or GNG. Ultimately, his WP article is the greatest plank in his notability, but it should be the other way around.  Britishfinance (talk) 19:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I did another search online and in books for him and found little. The Politico press release appears in a few sources (identical language), but it is actually the best ref I could find.  I searched using his name and including combinations of his alma mater, past employers, but really nothing.  Even his WP:MILL TV appearances appear to be centered around a small controversy regarding statements he made on Trump's COVID diagnosis (the Trump administration seemed to take him off after that).  I found some small pieces from his time as President of GU union, but nothing that would help BASIC (nevermind GNG). It is really the Politico press release, but that it not enough for a BLP. Britishfinance (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You can dismiss it as a suspected press release but Politico does not label it such and I do not see any other outlets running it without crediting Politico. Further comparing a white house spokesman that is regularly on national news to a midwest cable weatherman is ridiculous under the MILL examples even though that is not even policy or guideline. Note that the coverage of the TV sparring are secondary sources to the interviews themselves compared to your weatherman example. All those little things you found plus the coverage I mentioned add up under BASIC. ("multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability") Morbidthoughts (talk) 21:09, 16 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep, the sources dug up by Mordbidthoughts clearly showcase that this person passes WP:GNG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 00:38, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I’m not seeing significant coverage independent of their job. Those sources don’t take this over the WP:GNG threshold. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 16:38, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete, doesn't meet WP:GNG. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 16:38, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete does not pass GNG, and not even close to holding a position at a level that would confer default notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:24, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, Britishfinance and others. Subject does not meet the WP:GNG or WP:NPOL.  Mini  apolis  01:29, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - does not meet WP:NPOL. The arguments above that 'other Deputy Press Secretaries have articles so we should keep this one' are not persuasive. ƒirefly  ( t · c ) 11:20, 22 February 2021 (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.