The result was keep. Spartaz Humbug! 20:42, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Fails WP:GNG - a seemingly very hard working, decent and totally unremarkable person. Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 03:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Just for the record, I'm not too keen on the assertion made in this diff [ [1]] that my nomination was racially motivated. I have no clue (and wouldn't have, from the content of the article) of what Jack Schwadron's ethnicity was. Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 03:47, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Collapsing wall of text by
BigMusicBaby, discussion should be about the deletion of the article not all of this...
| ||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Please see the attached guide on Articles for Deletion on Wikipedia: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#Before_nominating:_checks_and_alternatives Your reason for deletion is an OPINION and is not a guideline listed by Wikipedia. You did not follow guideline C.2. "If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article". You were so quick to jump to delete the article, when as you can see, I have since added a lot more information. You did not follow any of the suggested steps for guidelines of deleting an article. If you read the article and did a search you would see that my citations are reliable and that I have been continuing to update with more information. If your deletion is not targeted then why were you so quick to nominate for deletion a second time when I removed the tag? If you did a simple search and read the article you would see that he is a notable person. Other steps you did not follow before deletion nomination: B. Carry out these checks 1.Confirm that the article does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, proposed deletion or speedy keep. 2. If there are verifiability, notability or other sourcing concerns, take reasonable steps to search for reliable sources. (See step D.) 3.Review the article's history to check for potential vandalism or poor editing. 4.Read the article's talk page for previous nominations and/or that your objections haven't already been dealt with. 5.Check to see if enough time has passed since previous nominations before renominating. 6.Check "What links here" in the article's sidebar, to see how the page is used and referenced within Wikipedia. 7.Check if there are interlanguage links, also in the sidebar, which may lead to more developed and better-sourced articles. Likewise, search for native-language sources if the subject has a name in a non-Latin alphabet (such as Japanese or Greek), which is often in the lede. C. Consider whether the article could be improved rather than deleted 1. If the article can be fixed through normal editing, then it is not a candidate for AfD. 2. If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article. 3. If an article has issues try first raising your concerns on the article's talk page, with the main contributors, or an associated WikiProject, and/or adding a cleanup tag, such as
4. If the topic is not important enough to merit an article on its own, consider merging or redirecting to an existing article. This should be done particularly if the topic name is a likely search term. If a redirection is controversial, however, AfD may be an appropriate venue for discussing the change in addition to the article's talk page. D. Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability 1.The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Bookssearch, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects. 2. If you find a lack of sources, you've completed basic due diligence before nominating. However, if a quick search does find sources, this does not always mean an AfD on a sourcing basis is unwarranted. If you spend more time examining the sources and determine that they are insufficient, e.g., because they only contain passing mention of the topic, then an AfD nomination may still be appropriate. 3. If you find that adequate sources do appear to exist, the fact that they are not yet present in the article is not a proper basis for a nomination. Instead, you should consider citing the sources, using the advice in Wikipedia:How to cite sources, or at minimum apply an appropriate template to the page that flags the sourcing concern. Common templates include
If you were concerned with notability, you should have searched for more sources and you would have found plenty of credible sources about Jack Schwadron. You were so quick to nominate for deletion without following any steps which is why your attack seems racially motivated based on other articles you have attempted to delete :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by BigMusicBaby ( talk • contribs) |
2020-10 ✍️ create
in this article, it says how Arthur Cohen was the co-founder of Arlen Realty & Development in 1959 and that serving as Arlen’s chairman, Cohen developed suburban shopping centers throughout the country.
https://rew-online.com/jp-morgan-funds-200m-loan-on-the-paramount-building/
In this article,in which Jack Schwadron is pictured alongside the Governor of Missouri, it says how Arlen Realty, of which Arthur Cohen was the chairman, was involved in the October 29, 1964 openings of the two Missouri E.J. Korvette stores,
BigMusicBaby ( talk) 18:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
March 1970, Francis Ford Coppola shot The Godfather scene between Michael Corleone and Kay Adams as they leave Best & Co. after shopping for Christmas gifts., which seems more suited for an article about Best & Co. itself, but that is not the point of this discussion. However, I do like to point out that some portions of this article, mostly the sheer number of quotes here, are trivial coverage. The only reason I'm !voting "keep" is because of his role as a major department store president, and even then, I'm not totally convinced that the current sourcing is sufficient. epicgenius ( talk) 16:32, 18 November 2020 (UTC)