Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ira Seidenstein


 * 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  DeleteThe arguments regarding the trivial nature of the published coverage are compelling. Kevin (talk) 10:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Ira Seidenstein

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

BLP with no third party sources. Probable autobiography. Prod was removed with significant cleanup, but no suitable sources added. I can find passing mentions of him in Google, such as in, but no substantial biographies or reviews of his work gadfium  19:34, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  — gadfium  19:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Agree with nom -- almost certainly written and edited mainly by non-notable subject himself. B.Rossow talk contr 20:00, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep – rewrite yes. However, I was able to find, which I believe is just enough, 3rd party – creditable – verifiable – independent sources, to warrant inclusion here on Wikipedia as shown here .  Thanks ShoesssS Talk 21:11, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Those mentions in news articles number 10 in total, and they are just that -- mentions, not features, four of which are from more than a decade ago and none of which establishes his notability. Simply having one's name listed in a few articles isn't enough or every petty criminal whose case goes to court would be eligible for inclusion here. -- B.Rossow talk contr 13:30, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Well first, he is not a petty criminal, but rather a performer. Second, did you read all the reviews?  They are not just passing mentions.  But rather talk about Mr.  Seidenstein Specifically .  Three, the reviews range in date from 1989 through 2008.  To me that enhances the argument for notability in that his achievements are not fleeting but carry for two decades.  Is he the next Penn or Teller probably not, but in my opinion has earned a spot here on Wikipedia.  Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 15:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Yes, I actually did read all the reviews. In four of the 10 listings, his name only appears in a list of credits within a review or notice of no more than a few sentences. In one his name only appears in a photo caption. Three of the articles are not available. In the other two, which are merely performance notices or reviews, his mentions are cursory and not the focus of the article. (Note that the latter article opens with "Less than 10 people saw the opening [...]".) That his name pops up from time to time in minor reviews of non-notable performances doesn't improve my opinion. I never said he was a petty criminal but was simply using that as another example of a type of person whose name might appear in a smattering of articles yet still not be noteworthy. Performer, politician, paedophile -- I don't care what someone does or did; if it's non-notable it doesn't belong here. -- B.Rossow talk contr 15:51, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. The findings of B.Rossow, especially the context of being peripheral mentions rather than dedicated write-ups, confirm for me the non-notability in this case. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 16:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete per nom. Wildhartlivie (talk) 23:25, 22 September 2009 (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.