Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Borish (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. Some cleanup and ensuring references in the article are active and dead links fixed would be prudent here, however. (non-admin closure) Steven   Crossin  Help resolve disputes! 02:28, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Peter Borish
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not independently notable, lack WP:RS, fails WP:GNG, clearly corporate spam. Meeanaya (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Meeanaya (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Meeanaya (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes GNG. Not perfectly sourced, but sources do exist.  OxonAlex    - talk  16:07, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Can you mention a few RS, that are covering this Business Exectutive in-depth and not his company? Unfortunately I can't find much and AFD is based on lack of in-depth WP:RS. Meeanaya (talk) 18:13, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete the passing references we have do not add up to passing GNG. Nothing here shows notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:43, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep co-founder of two significant charitable foundations, co-founder of Tudor Investment Corporation, and served as Chairman of several financial institutions (and there is a lot of coverage out there that needs to be sifted through since he is a "go-to" guy for market commentary).Patapsco913 (talk) 03:24, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Quotations by an article subject are not documentation of an article subject. Please cite sources showing that this person's life and works have been properly documented in depth. Uncle G (talk) 06:24, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Well I did not say that. I merely stated that there is a lot of chaff out there since Borish is a stock market commentator. Anyhow, a vandal hit the article on 5 March 2019 and hid most of the references which the nominator did not seem to notice or check why there are 31 citation numerals and only 5 citations appearing below. This article passed AfD before and his been around since 2012. It should have been hit with a request for more citations tag with a note placed on the talk page. It definitely needs a cleanup and some dead links repaired. Her edits show she spent 2 minutes between tagging AfDs. How can you go through 31 sources that fast? Patapsco913 (talk) 10:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep and restore some of the deleted content. I wish Meeanaya would be somewhat less active in his deletionism; he causes way too much to save articles on marginally notable people.  Dicklyon (talk) 00:16, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep thanks to the diligence of Patapsco913. I think between the books and the Bloomberg the case is made for WP:NCORP. It is difficult to sift through all of the primary material (contributions, video interviews, etc.) to find in-depth coverage of the man (which is at least a little ironic, right?), but I appreciate that there seems to also be a lot of dated material not available in GNews. For example, there's an oft cited Barron's profile of Tudor Jones in which Borish's model–and the fact that he fudged some of the data when overlaying charts–is discussed in depth, and I imagine there was significant press when this model correctly predicted the market crash later that year. Similarly, there has to have been coverage of this co-founder back in 1988 during the launch of the Robin Hood Foundation, I just can't find anything digitized. Pegnawl (talk) 21:22, 13 August 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.