Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dina Wein-Reis


 * 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. (non-admin closure) &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  12:01, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Dina Wein-Reis

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP1E in which the one event is entirely negative.  brew crewer  (yada, yada) 02:03, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:45, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 02:46, 1 September 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) 12:17, 8 September 2013 (UTC)




 * Keep. A decade-long criminal career can hardly be classified as an "event" for the purpose of WP:BIO1E. Substantial coverage in reliable sources, spanning period 2008–13, should be more than enough for WP:CRIMINAL. Hqb (talk) 12:45, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * No idea where you got "decade" from and the WP:CRIMINAL you cite to supports deletion as this case does not satisfy the conditions set forth therein. Whatever. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 23:01, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It says "for over a decade" right there in the first line of the "Fraud Conviction" section, and e.g. the Fortune article says, "For at least 15 years Wein Reis had made a fortune by allegedly gulling dozens of consumer product giants ... in exquisitely orchestrated scams.". Her arrest in 2008, conviction in 2011, and sentencing in 2013 were all considered noteworthy enough to generate substantial, in-depth coverage in reliable sources – which is what allowed a properly sourced WP article on her to be written in the first place. Hqb (talk) 18:43, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep per substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 21:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep – It is difficult to consider the 15 years of fraud mentioned by the Fortune article Hqb has cited as a singular event. Additionally, the paragraph from said article beginning with "But what she is accused of doing was fabulously brazen; she had the temerity to sting some of the world's biggest corporations -- not just once, but again and again." suggests that the crimes meet WP:CRIMINAL's guideline that their execution be unusual and noteworthy. Egsan Bacon (talk) 16:15, 10 September 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.