Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Caputo


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 21:29, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Michael Caputo

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Despite his having been Carl Paladino's campaign manager, and being discussed in one New York Times article, I don't think he meets our notability guidelines, see WP:BIO. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:39, 23 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:POLITICIAN tells us that just being an unelected candidate for political office does not guarantee notability, and what we have here is even less: someone who was not even an unelected candidate, but just a campaign manager for one. The one and only source cited as a reference is not substantial enough coverage to establish notability. This article has been created by a single purpose account which seeks to publicise the newly formed and non-notable "Federalist Party" and its members, of which Caputo is one. (The party has little if any connection, apart from the name, with the notable historical party of the same name.) Early versions of the article were highly promotional, consisted almost entirely of copyright infringing text, and plugged his membership of the Federalist Party. Subsequently other editors have removed the unacceptable content, and what is left is a tiny stub on a non-notable subject. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:59, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment A very interesting person. "Caputo was an election adviser to Boris Yeltsin's administration and lived in Russia from 1994 to 1999", says Washington Post, July 13, 2004; Page A15 . He commented in the article on the murder of his friend, the journalist Paul Klebnikov, see also Congressional Record, p. 17360-61, available here (it is the same article as the one published in Washington Post, but it contains an explanatory introduction). He has worked for George H.W. Bush, Rock the Vote, David Lynch, and the Nicaraguan Contras, you can read in an interesting article published by the New York Observer . “It’s like he’s Forrest Gump,” says one person interviewed by the newspaper. His unusual campaign strategies have been noted by Miami New Times, and you can find a detailed information about him in an article published by Buffalo News (available through findarticles.com). I'm sure it is possible to find out more. Is that enough for Wikipedia notability requirements? I read WP:BASIC: A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 11:12, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete C'mon -- the requirement is that the sources in some way establish the person's individual notability - not that we search for any sources mentioning his name at all. Find some place which treats him as an individually notable person in a reliable source - until then this is a pretty clear "delete" !vote. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:39, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your opinion. Some of the sources - the NYTimes, Miami New Times - provide quite a substantial information exclusively about him, and the information in the other sources linked above is not a simple "passing mention" or just his name. I agree that being a campaign manager is a pretty weak claim of notability. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * What??? The New York Times article you linked is an article by Caputo, not about him. Apart from saying "By Michael R. Caputo" at the top of the article, the only mention of him on the page is a one sentence note about his past career. To claim that this "provide[s] quite a substantial information exclusively about him" is so far beyond reasonable as to make it difficult to assume good faith. The only one of the sources you link to which is essentially about Caputo, as opposed to either being about him or else mentioning him a few times, is the one posted on blogs.miaminewtimes.com, and that one really does not constitute very substantial coverage. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:03, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * JamesBWatson, check the The New York Times link again, and please, try to stay calm. The article is exclusively about Mr. Caputo and it is written by Mr. Javier C. Hernandez, as far as I can see. I don't have the slightest intention to start some crazy theories or defend an article out of vanity. I'm not a newbie and I know quite well what is appropriate to say at AfD and what is not. From I have found, I can imagine a good article about him (of course, written by a competent and responsible editor). However, I don't plan to work on it and the editor who started the page spends time with other things. I'll let it go in peace, but I can say what I think. Moreover, it is just my opinion. Please, respect that and read carefully before commenting about how difficult it is to assume good faith. Thank you. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 13:24, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Clarification: I think JamesBWatson meant the Washington Post article, not the NYT one. Yunshui (talk) 14:02, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did mean the Washington Post article. Thanks to Yunshui for the correction, and apologies to Vejvančický for my mistake. I was actually very surprised that Vejvančický had made such a mistake, as my impression of Vejvančický's editing has always been good. Well, it turns out that I was the one making a mistake. Yes, the The New York Times is genuinely about Michael Caputo, as Vejvančický says, and that does weaken my case for supporting deletion. I still think that there is not enough coverage to establish sufficient notability to keep the article, but my "delete" is a much weaker "delete" than it was. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per my comments above. In my opinion there's enough coverage to build a decent article about this person. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 13:27, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I searched the Proquest news archive. While Caputo has been quoted frequently in regard to the Paladino campaign, the only article I could find about him was about a minor traffic infraction which turned into a charge of resisting arrest. If Vejvančický could add the information he found to the article maybe I'd change my mind.   Will Beback    talk    22:02, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete One sentence, and nothing added in a week... I'd say this one should probably go. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:09, 30 September 2011 (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.