Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Radusky


 * 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. — Cactus Writer (talk) 16:11, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Henry Radusky

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The page previously contained a variety of controversies surrounding the individual's architectural projects, that do not necessarily reflect personal controversies. Furthermore, upon searching for information about the individual, little information (besides that from the NYC Office of Professions and a LinkedIn profile) appears. It is therefore my proposal that the page be deleted as its subject is not sufficiently notable. --Hunterm267''Talk 21:58, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:21, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:22, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:17, 16 August 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jdcomix (talk) 16:18, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting per sources presented later in the discussion.
 * Delete - most of the deleted content was not focussing on Radusky, but on a coatrack-y listing of projects he was involved in as architect - with lots of irrelevant details. Radusky is only mentioned in passing in his obvious role as architect, none of the sources offers additional relevant biographical information. The general problem with the underlying certification process is sufficiently mentioned in Self-Certification (New York City Department of Buildings), but a Wiki-article should not serve as a directory or "list of shame" of such incidents without sufficient topic-related context. On a sidenote, several other related articles have also been edited in an apparent attempt to raise more awareness for these problems in New York City (WP:NOTADVOCACY applies). Removing these coatrack details, the remaining content and sources directly about Radusky are not sufficient to establish notability. GermanJoe (talk) 17:27, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - Pretty clearly a notable architect in NYC as a founder of Bricolage Design, see, for example THIS PIECE in the Village Voice and THIS PIECE in the New York Daily News would indicate. Meets GNG. Carrite (talk) 18:27, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:07, 29 August 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: See last relist

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  12:45, 6 September 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: No discussion was generated by last relist. Final relist.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TheSandDoctor (talk) 01:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete This appears to be a WP:MILL architect, and the article as written has no working references. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:CREATIVE. After all the controversial material was removed, it is also became apparent the subject fails WP:GNG as well.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 02:35, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - Fuck it, this has been held over FIVE times. Not supposed to happen that way. I will get out of the way. Carrite (talk) 01:25, 22 September 2017 (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.