Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuart H. Singer


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 00:32, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Stuart H. Singer

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not a notable person under Wikipedia Guidelines. Appears to be a self-serving lawyer biography FlagKite (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I cannot find significant coverage for this person, and it is likely to remain a poorly (not reliably/independently) referenced BLP. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 17:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep He was mentioned in the New York Times. It seems he is one of the lead counsel attorneys in the Madoff case according to this.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I find that to be a trivial mention, not significant coverage. I also currently have little reason to believe that working the Madoff case would be anything beyond WP:BLP1E, if that. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 20:15, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Being a named lawyer in the Madoff case is probably about as high profile as a lawyer in his profession can get without being a DA or something.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 05:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Enough press coverage on multiple cases to create biographical article.  Supreme Court clerk and member of American Law Institute, which is neither necessary nor sufficient for notability, but certainly tends to show notability.  (Disclosure: I'm a member of ALI.)  Wikipedia has kept articles of people far less notable, and deleted articles of people more notable, so it's not a slam dunk either way. THF (talk) 15:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 17:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. He is a published author with a respected academic publisher, Oxford University Press, and one of the top 500 lawyers in the US according to LawDragon. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 14:17, 18 January 2010 (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.