Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Kleinman


 * 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 no consensus.  Sandstein  06:36, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Nathan Kleinman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable activist and politician. Does not have significant, in-depth coverage from independent sources. The citations in the article are (a) primary sources not independent of the subject; (b) are passing mentions that are not substantial or in-depth; or (c) constitute WP:ROUTINE coverage. Neutralitytalk 15:45, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:45, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:45, 16 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete- as per nom. Does not meet WP:NPOL--Rusf10 (talk) 18:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets GNG per     . ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 01:03, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * These seem like WP:ROUTINE coverage of a political candidate. Neutralitytalk 01:33, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Did you even look through the articles? Not all are routine, and not all are about politics either. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 02:02, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * They all mention either his Occupy involvement or congressional runs. Sure, some of them talk mostly about farming, but not particularly in depth. His group, the Experimental Farm Network, seems to be quite small. Neutralitytalk 02:04, 19 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Strong delete no actual claim to notability. The coverage of his campaign was not enough to overcome the very high hurdle one must cross to be notable for just seeking public office, and nothing else adds up to showing notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:51, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * How about creating an experimental farm network that was the subject of a NYT article. Do you ever vote keep? Sometimes I wonder whether you actually look at the sources, or just examine the nominating claim and vote delete. The fact that he is running for office is important but not the only source of his notability, he was also an important Occupy figure. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 16:13, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep – Meets WP:BASIC per a review of available sources, such as those provided above by . Not seeing how several of the sources (per the above) could be defined as, "... WP:ROUTINE coverage of a political candidate". For example, the following sources are focused upon the subject's horticultural and food activism work:, , . It is inaccurate to define these sources as routine political coverage, because they are not as such at all. Fact is, only the second source in my !vote has a mention of his abandoned run for congress, which is simply a passing mention of this aspect of the subject. The other two sources in my !vote don't even mention the congressional run. Overall, the combined coverage the subject has received is congruent with meeting WP:BASIC. North America1000 06:30, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   06:01, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep As identified in detail by Editorofthewiki, the scope and breadth of the coverage about the article's subject surpasses the notability standard. Alansohn (talk) 15:46, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Agreed. WP:BASIC seems to be established here. Jases76 (talk) 01:14, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - coverage from Vox Media & The New Yorker Joaomufc (talk) 14:53, 29 June 2018 (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.