Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabriel Schoenfeld (3rd nomination)


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Gabriel Schoenfeld
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails to meet GNG. Almost entirely primary-sourced article with just one marginal secondary mention; does not meet WP:AUTHOR or WP:JOURNALIST with few reviews and no significant body of work Cambial — foliar❧ 23:13, 7 June 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:47, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Cambial — foliar❧ 23:17, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">Read! Talk! 23:28, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes criteria 3 of WP:NAUTHOR. He's the author of several high profile op-eds that have received much critical backlash. A PROQUEST search revealed numerous reviews (many highly critical) of his writing in The New York Times (NYT), Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post (WP), etc. Additionally, there are multiple critical reviews of his books in major publications like the NYT and WP. WP:BEFORE was either not followed or was incompetently followed.4meter4 (talk) 18:02, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * <p class="xfd_relist" style="margin:0 0 0 -1em;border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 2em;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment. 4meter4 didn't provide specifics, so I will. I show one book review in a journal: . I show one book review in the NYT and a set of letters to the editor dunking on one of his columns: . I have another set of letters to the editor from the LA Times  but cannot find actual reviews from editorial or newspaper staff. I cannot find reviews of his WaPo work or columns in said paper, but can find a significant mention of one of those columns in the publication of the World Socialist Web Site: . I don't doubt the breadth of his body of work as a columnist, but that's all primary sourcing. Right now, I'm leaning delete owing to lack of significant secondary source coverage; if  could attach the sources they found in their WP:BEFORE, I'd be grateful.  Iseult   Δx parlez moi 23:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I also located the two letters to NYT and the book review in the same. I agree your view that it is insufficient – nor close – to meet a level of secondary coverage for WP:AUTHOR. <span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#4682B4 0.1em 0.1em 1.5em,#4682B4 -0.1em -0.1em 1.5em;color:#000000"><i style="color:#999900">Cambial </i>— <b style="color:#218000">foliar❧</b> 17:40, 24 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete per Iseult's analysis of the references. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:05, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Despite the status of some references, their content does not indicate notability. Doczilla  @SUPERHEROLOGIST 08:52, 29 June 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.