Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ted Eisenberg


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 07:59, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Ted Eisenberg

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non notable figure in our field Droliver (talk) 18:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - THIS PIECE from Aol.News features the Dr. in his alter-ego as knife thrower. Assertion in lead (difficult to check from source showing) that he is a Guinness Record holder in his field, which is CONFIRMED HERE. Bad nominations of this sort abound on this day and I've seen enough. Carrite (talk) 00:47, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

There is nothing of note re. this surgeon's professional accomplishments, appoinments, notable achievements, or otherwise that merit inclusion. It's an absolutely inane entry to include unless we've decided to lose any editorial standard of merit (i'm off my soapbox now)Droliver (talk) 21:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC) 
 * Delete I'm sorry, this guy doesn't make it IMO. He self-claims that record number of surgeries, rather than being from any independent source - the source is a press release. And his knife-throwing gets coverage only in "news of the weird" type stories like the one in AOL. --MelanieN (talk) 03:28, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I, too, am not convinced that a surgeon self-reporting his case load to GWR, then using that as a marketing tool via PR Wire or such, is notable. I don't recall any consensus regarding inherent notability of GWR holders. Concerns regarding WP:NOT, too. (Official record here) Location (talk) 07:27, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * weak keep the AOL article is fine. The short GWR and short and sort coverage in sfcosmeticsurgery would seem to be enough to make it (just) over the bar.  Hobit (talk) 13:47, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 00:26, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - The claim of holding a world record establishes notability with a independent source verifying it. As for the rest, I think is a content issue. Phearson (talk) 01:37, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Although he's mostly been reported on in "look at the weirdo!" columns, those columns have appeared in reliable news sources. The Guinness World Record (which Guinness confirm, source added to article]) should be enough to push him over the notability bar, especially as it's been mentioned in the media. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 14:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Notability established via world record and news coverage in several sources.--Stvfetterly (talk) 14:26, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per AOL news coverage, Guiness World Records verification and this reliable source I added to the article. Topic passes WP:GNG.
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 14:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The Metro source was already in the article; I've moved your addition back to an inline citation, where it was before. Yunshui 雲&zwj;水 15:11, 12 January 2012 (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.
 * 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.