Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phillip Silverstone (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   delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:04, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Phillip Silverstone
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article on former wine merchant and broadcaster of borderline notability at best. Apparent autobiography, article was promotional. Unsourced claims and puffery were removed. Subject, after repeatedly blanking the text, now requests deletion, which should be granted per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. Coretheapple (talk) 13:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment After filing this AfD, it came to my attention that this is a re-creation of an article that was deleted per a previous AfD discussion.WP:Articles_for_deletion/Phillip_Silverstone. Apparently nobody noticed when this article was re-created two months after the 2008 deletion. This article should be Speedily deleted and salted. The same account that created this article, which was indef blocked for sockpuppetry, also created Phillip silverstone, which was speedily deleted and should also be salted. Coretheapple (talk) 13:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. This article as it stands isn't eligible for speedy deletion (it wasn't created in violation of the blocked user's sanctions, it isn't the same (any more) as the deleted version, and it contains sufficient sourcing to make a claim of significance). That said, having hunted for sources I've struggled to find anything that doesn't ultimately originate from Silverstone himself. I'd be up for changing my !vote if a few independent sources were found, but from what I can see, there isn't enough out there to satisfy WP:GNG or WP:AUTHOR. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  15:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I edited it extensively to try to salvage it, but that was not satisfactory to the subject, who persistently blanked the page and restored the puffy version. I was contemplating nominating it for deletion myself, and the subject's wish to have it deleted clinched it for me. Please note that while the subject did make a legal threat, he also explicitly asked for it to be deleted, and I think we should honor his wishes irrespective of his conduct, per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. Coretheapple (talk) 17:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Per subject request and individual seems of marginal notability. Thincat (talk) 01:03, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Found this source which says he was twice nominated for an Emmy (though Emmy's can be regional, needs verification). I could probably put together a case for notability using commercial databases which archive pre-Internet when he was more active and (potentially) had more coverage, but since a request for deletion was made I will support that and let it go. -- GreenC  07:29, 22 January 2014 (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.