Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Singer (attorney)


 * 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.  Sandstein  09:03, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

John Singer (attorney)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Longstanding article on subject who does not meet WP:N criteria. Even though we've had this around for 10 years there is no indication that the subject rises to the level of notability. Basic claims to fame are "name partner" in a law firm and frequently available for interview in the press.

The article has many other obvious flaws but the key issue here is that even with a committed editor the subject doesn't meet our notability criteria.

Also of note, all significant content has been added by four users: three of them added content only to this article; the other was an IP editor from the article subject's own company. An admin may want to check where the edits from the three named accounts originated. Rupert Clayton (talk) 06:01, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)


 * More info... all links out of this article are to very generic articles. The only inbound mainspace link is from a DAB page. So no great indication that he's of relevance beyond his own orbit. He does get himself in the press somewhat, recently because he's happy to defend #MeToo-accused men. If that passes the WP:N bar (I think not), then the puffery could be excised and the article could be reduced to a stub.Rupert Clayton (talk) 06:16, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Looking through the 60,000 hits that come up on Google, most of what I'm seeing are just mentioning "so and so's lawyer... John Singer". I'm not finding anything relevant to significant cases, or anything to really put him over the weakest general criteria. We don't really have a criterion for Lawyers, since this failed so we have to go off of a generalized notability right? Other than being on talk shows for interviews, what would qualify him? Nothing that I can see. Dusti*Let's talk!* 07:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 08:35, 3 April 2019 (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.