Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry Ceisler


 * 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The result was Speedy Keep, withdrawn by nominator.

Larry Ceisler

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Questionable notability. Article is predominately copied from its first resource; resources are strictly informational and offer no context for notability. Datheisen (talk) 01:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The individual is a prominent Pennsylvania political analyst. Sure, it needs more sources, but per WP:N, sources provide "evidence of notability," they don't determine notability. Full disclosure: I created this article. --Blargh29 (talk) 01:19, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Prominent" is precisely the sort of concern I am referring to. There's no evidence to back up this claim. Sources don't alone determine notability, but what is providing it here if we have nothing else to go on but a personal claim? Datheisen (talk) 01:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Per Lead section, the first paragraph is a short summary of the article. "Prominent" is a word that summarizes this individual's penetration and importance within his field, all of which is supported by several refs. It would be foolish to list this individual's every position and evey contribution to Pennsylvania politics. (Such a list would include being a political commentator for news programs and testifying as a certified expert witness in Pennsylvania politics in federal court.--Blargh29 (talk) 02:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy Keep after discussion with article author and no further concerns. Datheisen (talk) 04:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Clarification: More specifically, the article makes no attempt to explain why the subject is notable compared to any other person with the same profession. Past jobs including those in local TV news simply isn't significant or substantial enough, and it doesn't come close to scratching WP:BLP suggested topic areas. Datheisen (talk) 01:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions.  —Blargh29 (talk) 03:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —Blargh29 (talk) 03:31, 26 October 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.