Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Tsemberis


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 16:13, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Sam Tsemberis

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability is not inherited. All sources are about org, not person Gaijin42 (talk) 17:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * speedy keep. Yes, notability is not inherited, but it this case Tsemberis is clearly a primary item of notability here. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * P.S. Created by a "drive-by" newcomer editor, the article requires attention of an experienced wikipedian, but a quick google search clearly shows that sources are plenty. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:35, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * As the "drive-by" newcomer, I apologize. I have actually been a wikipedia editor for over a decade, but it has been a long time and I am out of practice. I have been meaning to add the Washington Post article link and to convert the remaining sources into Wikipedia's suggested formats, but have not had time to do so. Than you for adding the article link. If you can refer me to tools that will help me efficiently convert the references I added into wikipedia links that would be terrific. Ms Chevrolet
 * See Talk:Sam Tsemberis for some advise. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:00, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 21:10, 25 May 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:54, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per  —Мандичка YO 😜 02:06, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has a profile in, non-trivial mentions in several books. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:39, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: The article is awful. Most of it is about "Housing First," which would present a good argument for "Redirect." The text of the argument -- ostensibly a biographical article, mind you -- never identifies the subject's place of birth or current residence. Furthermore, it talks about "then" he does this and "then" that, and he always does it "here." Here? Really? That's fantastic! This homelessness cure is here? I'll remember that when my employer folds, because surely "here" means here. It doesn't mean Washington, D.C., does it? I love how people do independent research, see that a person is discussed, and then say "keep," as if that were the end. This article isn't about the person, and it doesn't inform a reader. Hithladaeus (talk) 13:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * There is WP:SUMMARY guideline which addresses the concern of unbalanced/duplicated text content. Yes, please remember him when your employer folds, your wife divorces you, your children forget you, you lose your right arm, so that you become a chronic alcoholic and a dirty tramp. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:25, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect I can't find anything about him that is really about him, not the method he has put into place to house the homeless. The WaPo article is the closest thing to being about him, but it says little about him as a person. Until more biographical information comes along, a stand-alone article on him hasn't got enough content to justify it. There is no reason why a bio article might not be suitable in the future. LaMona (talk) 20:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep there's this WaPo piece, and seemingly non-trivial mentions here and here. They are not exclusively interested in the housing project; they consider him as a person, and how his background impacts his work; they see him as notable besides his involvement in the project. Vanamonde93 (talk) 03:42, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep also. I am agree with Shad Innet (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2015 (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.