Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronald Schiller


 * 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. The WP:BLP1E arguments were not fully refuted. There were calls to merge to James O'Keefe or NPR but both pages already have thorough coverage of the event. J04n(talk page) 15:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Ronald Schiller

 * – ( View AfD View log )

126 news sources, according to Google--but I maintain this is WP:ONEEVENT, and nothing more than a name-and-shame to boot. We are not the news, and this is not how notability is achieved. Drmies (talk) 20:54, 8 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge: This is a significant event based on news coverage in reliable secondary sources, schiller does not appear to have much notability apart from this though. Merge into the article about James O'Keefe and his videos. Warfieldian (talk) 21:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It is pretty easy to find extensive press coverage of his success as a fund raiser, most notably for the University of Chicago. There are lots of news articles about him before this incident.I.Casaubon (talk) 21:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I could live with a merge, yes--but not with this current BLP violation that flies in the face of NPOV and any idea of balance. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. The version (at the moment) doesn't seem to violate BLP content or sourcing-wise, and the statements are neutral.  The violation if any would be a weight issue that it covers (albeit neutrally) only a single derogatory incident about a person who is potentially not notable.  The NPR / secret tape incident is current news, and I'm sure this article will settle down soon, and we can iron out any lingering BLP and neutrality issues.  The longer-term question is whether Schiller is notable.  Query to I.Casaubon: would you mind listing some of those sources or adding them to the article?  If that's true then he's probably notable and should have his own, balanced, article.  I just couldn't find any in a quick google search.  - Wikidemon (talk) 15:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: This article needs to be improved; this will occur naturally over time. Why is there a rush to delete this article?  The rush to delete could be interpreted as a form of censorship.  (I am not saying that it is censorship, but why invite the criticism?)  This is a very significant event, and this might be the eventual cause of NPR "defunding".--74.0.166.140 (talk) 23:41, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Even if so, that doesn't alleviate the WP:BLP1E concern I have. Go through the article and try to decide what else this person is besides that one event: vice president of two minor offices at Chicago and Carnegie Mellon, to the tune of two sentences here and a bit here from the U of Chicago news outlet, and director of the Aspen Institute Arts Program, according to a press release. None of these things would have made him notable in their own right, separate or combined. This one event, no matter the press coverage these last few days, should not make him notable either. And given the obvious disparity between his previous jobs (about which no one can say anything, given that there are no sources) and the coverage of this scandal, the undue weight seems pretty obvious to me--see WP:UNDUE, fourth paragraph, for which this present article is a poster child. Finally, why the rush to delete? No, the shoe is on the other foot: why this rush to create the article? We are not the news, and all we can do--given the sources--is name the subject and shame him some more. Drmies (talk) 20:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)


 * In response to Wikidemon, I did put links to articles form the Denver Post and the Chicago Tribune into the third paragraph. These articles were published before the sting interview.  There are others like them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by I.Casaubon (talk • contribs) 03:59, 10 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge per Warfieldian. This is at best BLP1E. --Bejnar (talk) 21:48, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, "all" he did was get the CEO of National Public Radio fired.  And not  because he "happened" to be in the right place at the wrong time, or something, but because of nasty, hateful things he actually said.  And "all" he was director of fund raising for one of America's most important media corporations.  And the story only led the news for two news cycles (days).  and it was "only" on the front page of the New York Times, and "only" above the centerfold at that.
 * And at the University of Chicago he "only" was the director of fund raising who turned the University's financial situation around and led a 2 billion $ fundraising campaign, which made the news then and when he was hired by NPR http://www.uncsa.edu/pressreleases/Releases2009/Aug09/4NEWBOT.htm http://www.fundraisingsuccessmag.com/article/npr-names-ronald-j-schiller-senior-vice-president-development-president-npr-foundation-412047/1   http://www.artnowmag.com/Magazine/News/2011/Mar/News_Mar0711.html    http://www.aspenbusinessjournal.com/article/id/418/sid/1  Raised $2 billion lately?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by I.Casaubon (talk • contribs) 13:50, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, I clicked and read the policy  "If the event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial and well-documented—as in the case of John Hinckley, Jr., who shot President Ronald Reagan in 1981—a separate biography may be appropriate. The significance of an event or individual is indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources."  Ron Schiller shot Vivian Schiller dead.   And that is a big deal in the American political world.   This dude is going to stay in the news at least as long as political battles continue over funding the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.  Here's an editorial (not an op-ed, an editorial) from today's LA Times http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-npr-20110311,0,2244064.story?track=rss   This is the kind of info that I personally go to Wikipedia to find.   You use Wikipedia when you want to know something like: what was this dude's career before he got attacked by a video?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by I.Casaubon (talk • contribs) 15:01, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: I really don't think Ronald Schiller is comparable in news notability to John Hinckley, Jr. I still don't see much in the way of reliable sources that refers his career prior to this incident.  Do you really think he should have a Wikipedia article if it were not for this incident?  If not, then he should be included in article that references the event for which he is notable. Warfieldian (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: At least for the time being. It's valuable to have a place to collect the relevant information to provide a neutral biographical summary for those who are seeking it.  It can be merged later on if, in retrospect, he is notable only for this event. —Morning star (talk) 19:03, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete ...and merge with the NPR article. (Oh look! Someone already did!) This page is nothing more than a current events scandal sheet about NPR funding, Tea Party Republicans, Muslims, liberal bias, Islamaphobes, fundamental Christians and racists.  Oh, and almost as an afterthought, the following mini-resume content appears to have been appended to give the impression that this is a Biography of a Living Person:
 * Ronald Schiller is an American administrator of not-for-profit organizations. Schiller is a 1986 graduate of Cornell University. Schiller has previously been employed by Carnegie Mellon University, the Eastman School of Music, the New England Conservatory of Music, Cornell University and the University of Chicago. At Chicago he led a $2 billion fund raising campaign and increased donations from $160 million per year to over $500 million by 2009.
 * The other 87% of this article content is already duplicated in at least 2 other more appropriate Wikipedia articles. Notability for this person outside of events this week does not exist. Xenophrenic (talk) 20:25, 11 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as this incident is already covered in the NPR article. I'm not suggesting a merge because to just move all of this into NPR would give this incident very undue weight. As of now, he has little notability beyond this incident (beyond a high-up fundraising guy at NPR wouldn't warrant him an article). Kansan (talk) 20:27, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * There are lengthy profiles of him and his fund raising success at both Chicago and NPR; written before the sting video. He was very good at what he does, talking big donors into making major gifts.  You have to google both Ron and Ronald.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by I.Casaubon (talk • contribs) 22:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sure that you could find Google hits on fundraising leaders of many other organizations but that still would not make them notable enough for Wikipedia. There's more to notability than that. Kansan (talk) 05:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - clear WP:BLP1E, already sufficiently covered in the NPR and James O'Keefe articles. If this story becomes more significant than it currently is, I could accept a separate article along the lines of ACORN 2009 undercover videos controversy, but not (at this time) a biography. Ronald Schiller is not (yet) notable as a person; if he's notable at all, it's only for his role in this controversy. Robofish (talk) 01:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:BLP1E.  There's nothing here except a couple of lines of resume material that can't be covered in the event article.  If more substantial info or sources are found that cover him outside of that incident, the article can be recreated. Gamaliel (talk) 04:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect per WP:BLP1E. Biography is notable only for the NPR event.--TM 16:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I understand that I lack the experience of older editors, but this man was at the center of a really big event at a national radio network. I believe that an article is appropriate because of this alone.  However,   Since other editors appear to think (wrongly) that his career was trivial until this month, I am now adding material about his earlier career.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by I.Casaubon (talk • contribs) 20:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)    Also Please note the dates of the articles about his appointment to the Aspen Institute; they predate the March 8 sting interview.

I put up a lot of information about his previous big-deal appointments to fundraising jobs, his success as a fundraiser, even his move to Aspen with his partner was covered in the press way back in 2005. I think guys who head departments in bid-deal institutions like the University of Chicago and NPR with notable (by the media) success are notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by I.Casaubon (talk • contribs) 21:25, 15 March 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.