Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Barak


 * 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. Consensus is that the article does not meet the notability guidelines. If anyone want the article userfying let me know. Davewild (talk) 07:40, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

David Barak

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Deprodded by article creator with an WP:OTHERSTUFF rationale (see article talk page) my concern remains that I can't find any evidence that this person meets the requirements of either WP:BASIC or WP:FILMMAKER at this time. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:00, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:02, 23 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, there are no claims of any significance, the biographical information is unsourced and the (unclear) contributions to non-notable works don't tell us much either. I can't see anything significant online about him, which suggests he must only be a california wannabe that hasn't made it yet. Sionk (talk) 22:36, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 14:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC) Sionk, there is no need for your bad attitude. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 02:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hauntedsandiego (talk • contribs) 23:06, 2 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete the whole #amned article because Sionk seems to think mockery and name-calling is okay. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 02:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hauntedsandiego (talk • contribs) 23:23, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That is not a valid argument for anything; and Sionk has not called you any names. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  01:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - article about a minor non-notable professional. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  01:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Do you feel "california wannabe" is appropriate for Wikipedia, Orangemike? I never said that Sionk called me names, but he or she was denigrating the subject of the article, who had nothing to do with its creation or maintenance. It's my contention that comments such as that are uncalled for. If discussion regarding the merits of this article is to take place in an honest and unbiased fashion, it seems to me those taking part in the discussion should maintain some decorum. In that spirit, I am modifying my previous statement to be a little more professional. Personally, I believe Sionk should consider an apology, not for the vote but for the way in which it was cast. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 02:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC) — Hauntedsandiego (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * It's not language I would have used, unless I suspected you were yourself David Barak; but that's still irrelevant to the appropriateness of the article. -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  02:09, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I suppose that would make it okay for me to call Sionk's parents a couple of in-bred siblings - it's not about Sionk so it must be okay. Anyway, is there a way we can accelerate the deletion of this entire article. The bickering here at Wikipedia is getting bothersome. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 02:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. No evidence of notability. Maproom (talk) 18:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 *  Comment removed his comments, which whilst it was a good gesture to do, shouldn't be done, as it makes other people's comments out of context. I struck the comments instead. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 20:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I've added some  tags to the article where you have information with no source.  If you can cite reliable sources that are independent of the subject (e.g. not his website, facebook page, twitter, blog, autobiography, or page about him on a company where he is employed) to support that information I will argue for the article to be kept, and I bet at least a few of the people supporting deletion will change their opinions. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 15:51, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you ONUnicorn, I appreciate the assistance. As for the items needing citations, there are some time-based problems, namely that many of the photography items are from so long ago that any authoritative sources have long since "expired" in a sense. For instance, Hispanic Business Magazine is no longer being published. I've seen examples of the article subject's photojournalism works in the forms of name-credited newspaper and magazine portfolio clippings, but since he moved away from that business years ago verifiable sources are pretty much dried up. Regarding the reference to his home town, I have no idea how to verify that but I can't imagine that would be a place a person would lie about being from. ; ) About the Navy items, all I can say I've seen a few personal pictures.

If this article ends up being deleted, is there a way to keep it semi-active, hidden in some way, for future reinstatement if more reliable data can be added? I knew the subject from years ago when we both worked in the San Diego area (newspapers), and I've seen his name pop up now and then in San Diego's film community. I guess maybe I jumped the gun on writing this article, but I got a little excited when I saw what became of him over the years. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 16:24, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You can cite Hispanic Business Magazine even though it's no longer being published; the source doesn't have to be available online (although it sure makes it easier to verify!). However, you mention photojournalism credits; a mere byline or credit isn't enough - what we're looking for to establish notability is something about the person himself, maybe a retrospective on his photography career, or an indication he won an award for photography or something.  Something to indicate (1) that people outside of Wikipedia have written about this person and (2) to show that all the information in the article is verifiable; that readers can trace where the information in the article came from. That's why personal memories and personal pictures aren't acceptable sources.  Other people can verify an article in Hispanic Business Magazine, even though they are no longer in print; because there are likely to be microfilmed copies in libraries and archives, the Wayback Machine at the Internet Archive probably has stories that were published exclusively on the web, hoarders have boxes in their garage and attic full of old magazines.  However, no one can verify your memory.
 * As for keeping it around; it can be moved to a user subpage like User:Hauntedsandiego/David Barak and you can continue to work on it there, and if more sources appear in the future it can be moved back into the encyclopedia. Look at User:ONUnicorn/Browning Hill Research for an example of a userspace draft.  Also, for more short-term storage and collaboration it can be moved to draft space at Draft:David Barak, but if it's in draft space for more than 6 months without anyone working on it it can be deleted without warning as an abandoned draft. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 17:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, I do know of an illustration award that was given to a Palm Beach Post team which he was a part of. It's part of an online database which seems to be "stable," and I can provide a link to that. Better than nothing. : ) It seems this is moving to something that's a little more acceptable for publication, but whether it moves close enough or not is up for debate. : )  Anyway, I'll add that award link and do a bit of searching for other things. Who knew it would be such a project for me? But I'm learning, and this Wiki markup stuff is fun. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 23:59, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete His biography is misleading as he is identified as a film director, film producer and screenwriter while in his IMDb profile it's clear that he was primarily a camera operator and assistant editor and he doesn't have enough credits to be notable in either of those occupations. Doesn't meet criteria of WP:FILMMAKER. If Hauntedsandiego wants to continue to work on this, Userfy it. Liz  Read! Talk! 22:22, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

What's userfy? : ) I looked in Wikipedia help and the search didn't come up with anything. I'm happy to do it though, even if that means taking it offline for now. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 00:06, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hauntedsandiego, "userfy" means that the article would be put in your user space for you to continue to work on it rather than it being deleted. It could be moved to a page like User:Hauntedsandiego/David Barak. However, I see that Draft:David Barak already exists and must ask are you are also Dbarak? It's unusual that two separate editors would focus on creating an article on the same person at the same time. Liz  Read! Talk! 00:59, 11 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Only evidence of notability provided is that he worked as a tech on something that won an award. Not enough. - Richfife (talk) 00:43, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not him, but we worked together several years ago and our paths recently crossed. He mentioned in passing his Wikipedia account, so I figured I'd take the ball and run with it, so to speak. (I'm female.) Hauntedsandiego (talk) 03:02, 11 July 2015 (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.