Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louis Lesser

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. After the rewrite by HkFnsNGA (talk · contribs), consensus is clear that the subject satisfies both WP:N and WP:V. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 01:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Louis Lesser

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I smell a hoax. Article makes some grandiose claims that this guy was, among other things, a "mentor to Warren Buffett and Kirk Kirkorian [sic]", and that he worked with U.S. President John F. Kennedy in developing "the largest HUD urban renewal project in the history of the western United States." As such, one would expect a simple Google search to yield all kinds of results, but it yields a bunch of hits to sources of questionable verifiability. KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC) Redacted; see below. KuyaBriBri^Talk 22:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the entire article and rewrote it. Sources for mid century news articles are difficult on the internet, since most newspapers are stored in library microfische, but I sourced all sentences in the new article. HkFnsNGA (talk) 01:52, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, hoax. The casino stuff, in particular, is easy to disprove, and none of it has reliable sources, of which of course there would be plenty if any of this were true. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:52, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The history of Las Vegas is very well documented, both online and off. You claim this person both owned and operated several major casinos during Las Vegas' golden era. Why, then does this person not appear in the indexes of either Las Vegas: A Centennial History or Las Vegas: An Unconventional History? Why is this person not even mentioned in the Las Vegas Online Encyclopedia? Why is this person neither among the Las Vegas Review Journal's First 100 nor even among the hundreds of others nominated for it? Why does the LVRJ's site search show no results for this person? Why does a Google News Archive search for this person's name and the word "Casino" produce nothing related at all? I don't doubt that a person named Louis Lesser exists or did exist, and that there is/was a Louis Lesser Enterprises at some point, but the grand claims stated in the article appear completely unsupported by any reliable sources. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 19:26, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Starblind is correct that this stuff SHOULD show up, and does not. And Lesser's operations appear to have owned most of the Howard Hughes properties in general, not just those in Las Vegas, and there are unsavory elements of teamster funding in the news stories I have been reading. I will not add any Las Vegas stuff without citations from reliable news sources. I apologize for my initial sloppy article, and hope the newly written one is more according to Wikipdia standards. HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:10, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete G3 (hoax). Clearly the name exists per the secinfo website, but there is no evidence to the accomplishments. I'll tag it momentarily. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 17:56, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- ~~Modifying !vote to delete and standing down on the speedy~~. With the facts backing this up, we now know he was a property builder/manager/owner/whatever, and that he is indeed alive. So any statements in the article where truthfulness is anywhere ranging from questionable to simply nonexistant is gone. However, I maintain the delete because the fact that he built some buildings, unto itself, does not make Mr. Lesser any more notable than the average realtor. If some sort of notability can be verifiably demonstrated, I will change my mind. My other commentary still stands. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 21:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All of these are primary sources ergo unusable for the purpose - they're abstracts for company business, and that's not independent of the source. The two news articles - LA Times and NY Times - are a maybe, and might give us a winner for a stub. I'll see if I can research them. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 23:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Additional note - I did not call Mr. Lesser a realtor. I used it as a comparative. If I should give advice, it's this: read carefully what people are saying. When you read too fast, you misread things, and it changes everything. Case in point: "ghit" is not a name, rather an abbrev for "Google hits". --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr andstuff) 23:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - author had blanked the page, says he's a new guy in another AFD for Cal Trans Pet Cemetery. See history. -(Rawr and stuff) 17:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That PDF only seems to mention his name, from what I could see. So clearly, again, there is a Louis Lesser, but you still have not provided any concrete documentation per the claims made in the article. You need to find this - there is no argument contraindicating this imperative. -- (Rawr and stuff) 21:25, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dennis The Tiger, I hope I have addressed your concerns in my rewrite, where I added LA Times and NY TImes sources, and removed material that I have not yet found proper sources for. HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:20, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- - Modifying !vote to keep for the purpose. The article's author has exercised diligence in improving this article and has demonstrated to me that he is willing to improve his work. Also working off of WP:OUTCOMES - if I remember right, this notes that people of extraordinary wealth tend to survive AFD as notable. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 01:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

JFK was killed two years before HUD was established. And I doubt greatly that the largest urban renewal project in the history of west Los Angeles (to say nothing of the entire western USA) involved only 712 housing units, as the article claims. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made a mistake, I said "HUD". I should have said "F.H.A." My apologies to User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz for wasting editor time from my own error. But I did not intend any "hoax". Please check the rewritten article to see if I have addressed your concern. Thank You. HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:28, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (hoax). There is no evidence of these fantastic accomplishments. I concede that I have not examined the reference pdfs provided by the creator as I can not physically read them. Hazir (talk) 19:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hazir, I hope the New York Times and Los Angeles Times sources I added in my rewrite have addressed your concerns. 23:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

The document attributed to the SEC was not written by the SEC. Rather, it was written by Tri National Development Corp., a corporation for which Lesser was serving on the advisory board, and filed with the SEC. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing your concerns, User:Metropolitan90, I removed the SEC sources and only included information that is directly from newspaper articles, not SEC sources. 23:37, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Okay. That document plus this and this show that a company called "Louis Lesser Enterprises" existed circa the 1960s, and said company had to do with the development of Barrington Plaza. It's still a long shot to verify that Mr. Lesser was a mentor to Buffett or Kerkorian. If he was indeed a mentor to them, where is even the most trivial mention about him in books written by or about either of them, or in interviews, public speaking appearances, etc. I also highly dispute this claim that he gave the Granada Hills area of Los Angeles its name. That name had been ascribed to the area since at least 1927 [1], while the article claims Lesser has been active since 1935. I also echo Starblind's comment above that the history and development of Las Vegas casinos is well documented; where is even the most trivial mention of Lesser there? KuyaBriBri^Talk 19:47, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Another note on the claim that Mr. Lesser named/developed Granada Hills, California ([2]): I just noticed the article shows Mr. Lesser was born in 1916. As I mentioned before, the name "Granada" had been ascribed to the area since 1927, according to area historians [3]. So best case scenario is that Mr. Lesser named and developed the area at the age of 11, and drove a car up the Spanish coast at presumably an earlier age. KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:48, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kuyabribri, you have convinced me that I got the Granada Hills story wrong. I removed all mention from the artilce. But the story I heard was very vivid in detail, and included photos. I will not put anything in the article without reliable sources again, even with a request for a citation needed. HkFnsNGA (talk) 00:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very funny... ha ha ha. Now can someone please close this AfD and put an end to this nonsense. I can't believe I wasted 10 minutes on this. SIGH. Hazir (talk) 20:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did not put the Trump stuff in the article. HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

::Even setting aside the obvious silliness of that story, you contradict yourself once again: if he was supposedly born in 1916 as the article claims, he would have been 83 around 1999, by which time the Trump Taj Mahal had been (rather famously) operating for nearly a decade. And Donald Trump's dad, Fred Trump never lived to age 94, either. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trump's father died at age 94 per the Wiki article. At that time Lesser was 83. Those are the exact ages in the story I heard. So if the verbal story I heard is true, there should be a sale of two properties from one or two of Lesser's operations to one or two of Trumps in about 1999-2000, but I dont know how to check.HkFnsNGA (talk) 00:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Be that as it may, then, you need to fix the article, and accordingly, we can deliberate over the facts found. This is where you need to fix the article. The object is to change our minds, and pointing out these details in here doesn't help as much as fixing it, especially when we have mentions of this that seem to be nothing more than random encounters on the surface. If you can find what we need, we'll change our minds. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 21:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dennis The Tiger wrote, "pointing out these details in here doesn't help as much as fixing it". I should have listened to User:Dennis The Tiger, but I did not know an AFD discussion lasted more than a few hours, and thought the article would be gone. I hope I have fixed the article enough now that it will not be deleted. HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The article creator is now claiming that Louis Lesser has been "erased from history" and that he just recently had "$15 BILLION stolen from him and is now penniless". If true that would have made him roughly the world's 18th richest person, prior to the theft of the $15 billion of course. Odd that the newspapers haven't cared to report any of this... oh, that's right, it's a conspiracy. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:46, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Starblind, if you read the SEC quote above, Lesser was richer than the 18th richest person. Just his holdings in Louis Lesser Enterprises, Inc., were $1.5 Billion in 1982, when he left. Read the SEC citations are provided above. Please assume goof faith, especially if you are not going to read the citations provided. 67.101.114.227 (talk) 00:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or stubify The article is a BLP that has some of the worst sources and information I have seen on WP. There are two "references" to authorsden.com, which links the reader to an about an author. The information needs to be sourced, as it looks now, most of the information looks made up with a couple blind refs attached to make it looked sourced. The article needs serious reworking, but deletion might be better. Angryapathy (talk) 21:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - retracting speedy to allow the creator to fix this. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 22:01, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete as blatant hoax. The fact that the article invokes the names of real people aggravates the problem, it doesn't prevent the article from being a hoax. The article subject couldn't have worked with JFK on a HUD project, for example, because JFK was killed before HUD was established. The inventions in this article are so flagrant and so obviously false that the creator can't be credited with any good faith. When you start googling the details, things fall apart completely; this article is the only Ghit for things like the "Redwood Gulch Redwood Reserve" and the "Thomas Henry Huxley Center." Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hullaballoo is correct', and I made a mistake, but so did the newspaper articles I got it from, because they said "Rattlesnake Creek", when it should be Rattlesnake Gulch, which is the name on the US Geological Survey Map for the "Loma Prieta Quadrangle". I removed the section, until I pull verifiable Santa Cruz County records. I did not cite sources correctly, and will not add the info back in until I do so. HkFnsNGA (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jumping on typos shows just how little good faith you have. Here's the search using the exact term used in the article, "Rattlesnake Gulch Redwood Reserve," with no results except the Wikiarticle. [4] Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 00:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought you input the Google search incorrectly. The newspaper article also used the wrong name. USGS Loma Prieta Quadrangle map says "Rattlesnake Gulch". There is no "Rattlesnake Creek". I removed the information until I get better sources. HkFnsNGA (talk) 00:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article you gave does not so much as mention Louis Lesser. In fact, the word Lesser does not even appear in the article. It mentions Mr. Diesel, and in fact points out a partnership between him and somebody that is not a Mr. Louis Lesser. This WP article, on the other hand, is not an article about Diesel or his ventures, it's about Louis Lesser - and accordingly, you need to turn up data about Louis Lesser. Not Mr. Diesel orh is partner in this affair, but Louis Lesser. I'm struggling to assume good faith here at this point in time because you've turned up nothing we can use and have given us resources that are entirely irrelevant to the subject at hand. Now stop wasting time here and turn up something that foots the bill. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 00:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete as BLP hoax. I don't know if the real Louis Lesser is still alive, but best to speedy delete this for the BLP issues all the same.--Atlan (talk) 23:32, 23 November 2009 (UTC) See below for my changed vote.--Atlan (talk) 00:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lesser just formed Lesser Diesel in Nevada, as cited in the article and above. He was also just honored at the Hollywood Woken's Club at the annual Rose Breast Cancer Society fundraiser, FOR EXACTLY WHAT IS IN THE ARTICLE, on record as a corporation in the State of Nevada, as cited. I supplied news sources above for every claim. Why are you saying "hoax"? That is not assuming good faith. That is not bothering to read the sources cited above. 67.101.114.227 (talk) 23:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You keep saying "assume good faith", which I count 7 times in this discussion alone, but you appear to be confused as to what that term means on wikipedia. Our assume good faith guideline does not force us to accept blatantly false or extremely unlikely information about living persons, nor does it prevent us from justly deleting untrue and potentially libellous content. You asked us to disprove the article, and numerous editors have pointed out exactly how this can't possibly be true as written. We asked you to provide reliable sources, and you link to thinks that don't actually support the article and claim that the real sources are unavailable because of some vast conspiracy to have Lesser "erased from history" as you put it. This would be unacceptable in any Wikipedia article, but it's worst of all in a biography of a living person, arguably the strongest policy we have here on Wikipedia. If you have sources that actually support the main points in the article (that Lesser supposedly owned a bunch of casinos and mentored famous people), let's see them. In the meantime, don't accuse other editors of not assuming good faith because they're not gullible enough to swallow this extremely improbable article hook, line and sinker. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 01:03, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as someone who, when you remove the hoax-y bits, itsn't notable. Bfigura ^(talk) 00:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed that parts without reliable sources. The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and LA Board of Supervisors all state that Lesser was VERY notable, and I put that info in, so I hope this addresses your concerns. HkFnsNGA (talk) 00:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm sticking with the WP:HOAX. HW noted the comment that Mr. Lesser buried Ferdinand Marcos in Hawaii - the problem is that he's in a mausoleum in the Phillipines, which completely discredits this. The author of the article is just dragging us along. I'm done feeding him and I exit here to no longer further the contributor's bad case of WP:BALLS. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 00:44, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marcos was interred on the island of Oahu. Oahu is in Hawaii. But I do not have reliable sources yet to include this, so I took it out.HkFnsNGA (talk) 00:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral I'm not saying anything one way or the other, but a Google News archives search on "louis lesser" returned interesting results. They're almost all PPV from the L.A. Times. DarkAudit (talk) 02:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not paying to investigate those archives further, but the City of Hope Man of the Year in 1961 is confirmed. Someone else will need to give the other articles a going over, but just the abstracts give more credence to the article than I had previously assumed. DarkAudit (talk) 03:38, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It is clear that Mr. Lesser was a real estate developer of some note in Southern California. Not knowing anything about real estate development in Los Angeles during the 1960s, I don't have any frame of reference to determine how notable he was but there is a probably a reasonable debate to be had. That said, User:HkFnsNGA you are doing yourself no favors with the article and with your arguments here. If you will take my advice, the best chance of having this article saved is to disengage completely and let some of the more experienced editors here take a shot at fixing the article before the AFD expires.CosmicPenguin (talk• WP:WYO^Help!) 05:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ The best way to fix this article is to delete it and start over, and build up a core of V material, rather than removing the 99% here that is not. DGG ( talk ) 06:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the article and started over, and tried to built up a core of V material. Have I met your concerns?HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:48, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, see below. DGG ( talk ) 06:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Disregarding the verbiage above and formerly in the now stubbed article, it is clear that Lesser is/was a major, notable real estate developer, as evinced by the number of gnews and gbooks hits, including this 1963 New York Times article on him or this 1960 LA Times article on him.John Z (talk) 21:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak keep~~ I came across this guy's name while researching the Barrington Plaza article. This guy seems largely forgotten but was at one point written about by some very widely read newspapers. It might take a lot of hours of research to untangle his confusing story, but he does seem notable, given the number of sources that exist. Note that the page creator requested I look at this article/AFD via my talk page... but as I'd already been working on the Barrington Plaza article, I was aware of this AFD anyway. --Sancho Mandoval (talk) 23:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually on further reflection maybe I should say I just don't think the guy is a hoax. He might have been ah, how shall I say it, given to questionable business deals... but he did exist and develop real estate. I think the jury's still out on notability. --Sancho Mandoval (talk) 23:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean Keep? You struck your "weak keep", but your comment seems to indicate "keep", but keep with the questionable deals, not keep with a whitewashed article.HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:46, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably not a good idea to mention things which are difficult to verify, like connections with Marcos or the Shah, irrespective of their truth. They obscure the fact that there are several major news source articles specifically on him, which would normally be more than enough to prove notability.John Z (talk) 07:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have found reliable sources on both of these, but I do not want to include them yet, because I think I have not yet read enough to write the full truth on the Shah and Marcos stuff, which may be much less flattering to Mr. Lesser than my original article. By the way, I was a student activist AGAINST both the Shah and Marcos. HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Article has been rewritten with Los Angeles Times and New York Times sources for all claims, addressing concerns of other editors. HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as hoax. Edward321 (talk) 15:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrite the article using a standard news source for each claim. I hope this convinces you that Louis Lesser is not a hoax, so you might change your vote. HkFnsNGA (talk) 23:40, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, NYT feature clear evidence of notability. Mice in drain (talk) 00:16, 26 November 2009 (UTC) — Mice in drain (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. May be sock - I doubt of anyone in this debate, but on checking, the few contribs don't really support being a Louis Lesser - SPA. John Z (talk) 20:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a hoax, and Notability - See here for much[5]

I'm sticking with my ~~delete~~ vote for now, as the article still reads like nothing more than a vanity page. Proving notability doesn't give one carte blanche for such hero worship. I appreciate the effort the article creator has put in to raise the standards of the artice to satisfactory levels, but it's not enough yet. I do think it's a good idea to userfy the article so HkFnsNGA can continue working on it.--Atlan (talk) 00:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC) Changed my vote once more down below.--Atlan (talk) 00:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Atlan, this is not "hero worship", but mix and matches of almost verbatim quotes from the only available news sources. I had a bunch of VERY negative stuff relating to the Shah of Iran, questionable timber practices, and Ferdinand Marcos, but another editor told me to take it out, since my sources were not good. Also, I had stuff relating to the sales of the Casinos to Hughes and Kerkorian, which had Teamster funding stuff, but the same editor suggested I leave it out as too far fetched, and not properly sourced. I don't think that if only positive news sources exist, that is a reason not to have a Wikipedia article on a person who is clearly one of a handful of the biggest developers in US history. I am all for putting the Howard Hughes, Teamster, Shah of Iran, Ferdinand Marcos stuff back in, but then the article will get deleted! HkFnsNGA (talk) 00:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Hero worship" was a figure a speech. In my opinion the article is still written too much in a style, that highlights Lesser's accomplishments to an unacceptable extent. Note that I now wish for the article article to be userfied, which means instead of deleting it, the article will be moved to your personal Wikipedia space so you can keep working on it, until such a time it is ready to be published as an article again. I feel this is fair, because of the time and effort you have put in so far.--Atlan (talk) 00:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All of the sentences in the article were taken from reliable sources, and no negative information was omitted. Which sentences should I fix, and I will do so. Otherwise, what is the basis for calling to delete an article about a person who has had hundreds of national news stories about him? HkFnsNGA (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If that is true, then we have a WP:COPYVIO issue. This needs to be fixed. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 09:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No artiocle was copied, but the information came from articles, and was combined into the sentences I wrote. No negative information was excluded. In fact, I am now looking for negative information, since there is all this weird Shah of Iran-Ferdinand Marcos-Jimmy Hoffa-Howard Hughes-JFK-Ronald Reagan- Warren Buffet-Kirm Kerkorian stuff, but it never directly mentions Louis Lesser, and one can only infer things by combining stories into a big picure, which I did not do in the article, since I did not want to be accused of "original research. Another editor seems to have drawn a similar conclusion. It looks to me like many of these buildings were made to house rich people underground in case of a nuclear war, and leave everyone else above ground to die, but that is just my own opinion, now. If you read all of the things I read, you get the feeling that there is something else going on from 1958 to 1982 that is veryn different than just "making money", since one person could not possibly have this many connections to all the bad guys in the world on the American side, without help. But maybe I am wrong, and I did not put any of this in the article.

I should have listened to your suggestion above, to simply fix the article, and not waste my time on this page arguing and responding, but I did not know that an AFD nomination allowed me enough time to do so. Now I am asking you to follow your own suggestion to me, which was a good one, and help fix the article, instead of wasting time here, if there is still something wrong with the article. There is an entire "David Susskind Show", with a young Warren Buffet across from Louis Lesser, but it is not transcribed. I will try to get a copy of the photo of Lesser with young Buffet from the show, but I can't do it until I visit Los Angeles again in a few months.

Is the article now better than when you first criticised it? I can not really find more information in news sources that does not duplicate what is already in the article. HkFnsNGA (talk) 13:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is better, indeed, and I note that. I'll be posting more to your talk page when I get some time, but the short version is that it still needs a good amount of work - more details and tips will definitely come from others. =) Given this, I'd be inclined to go with a userfy !vote to allow you to work on it without the risk of deletion. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Article has been completely rewritten with all unsourced material removed, using only reliable sources. HkFnsNGA (talk) 02:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately that's just not so. I'd reaffirm my delete !vote; this article may concern a living person who's apparently notable, but its history is so riddled with misinformation, and every draft has been so badly sourced, that I doubt there's any version with significant content that doesn't involve BLP violations. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 13:58, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. I am still learning.HkFnsNGA (talk) 03:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ I'll be looking into more things, but according to http://www.secinfo.com/dv22g.4f8d4.htm , (I quote) "LOUIS LESSER. Mr. Lesser has been a consultant to the Company since 1991 on financing and real estate transactions. Mr. Lesser has successfully

built, owned and operated numerous real estate companies, hotel properties and oil and gas companies since 1935, including Chairman and President of Louis Lesser Enterprises, Inc. of Beverly Hills, CA, which was listed on the American Stock Exchange." This is in relation to Tri National, which according to the article: "Louis Lesser was the founder and owner of Tri National Development Corporation." The section goes on to refer to 'this wife of 70 years' - should this be 'his (etc)'? As to Zenith Refinery, the only ghits for this connection are this article and http://www.zoominfo.com/Search/ReferencesView.aspx?PersonID=1249224814 . Peridon (talk) 20:04, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the original Zenith Refinery Public Offering brochure, with a picture of Louis Lesser at the controls (with 1970's sideburns!), but it was deleted by and editor, with no notice to me of doing so, and no warning, and no explanation. Can something be put in that at least says that Zenith Refinery's public brochire from 1975 claimed Lesser was the founder and president? Also, there is a lot of stuf on this in Chinese newspapers, but I don't know how to cite it in this English language Wikipedia.HkFnsNGA (talk) 20:53, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that profiles can apparently be added at zoominfo (probably on receipt of the appropriate fee - it is a commercial site). Peridon (talk) 20:04, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know Zoominfo was a pay to post. I worded it as being self published, but will delete the section if it is not reliable. HkFnsNGA (talk) 20:53, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it's self-published (or editable) it doesn't really matter whether it's pay or not. It's the self bit (or the editable) that counts against reliability. Peridon (talk) 20:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. OK, I did not know and I deleted the whole section.

2. Why was the Public records Special Commendation for Louis Lesser, from the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors, and SIGNED by each of them, dleeted? And why is this not a reliable source, since it was signed by each and every Supervisor? It verifies much of the article's information. If it is, can you help me fix getting it undeleted, since it was deleted as a "copyright violation"

3. Also, why is the public record 1963 Annual Report of Louis Lesser Enterprises, Inc., audited and signed by Arthur Anderson himslef, not a source, at least a source of what Arthur Anderson and Loiuis Lesser Enterprises claimed and put in the public record to get listed on the American Stock Exchange? If it is, can you help me fix getting it undeleted, since it was deleted as a "copyright violation".

4. Finally, what is the basis of your "delete" vote, and is there anything to change it?HkFnsNGA (talk) 20:53, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Being acceptable as a source is different from being hosted by Wikimedia. They may be usable for sourcing, but not able to be uploaded in full. The Zoominfo stuff is coming from Creative Environments; if you can get sourcing direct from them, or earlier versions of their site from the wayback machine, that would be usable.John Z (talk) 21:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your time. Do you know how to get the Board of Supervisors Commendation onto Wikimedia Commons, and keep it there, so it can be cited?HkFnsNGA (talk) 21:09, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The basis of my !vote is that there appears to be little backing for the parts of the article I have investigated so far, and that others haven't found much either. If reliable references are produced - not for Lesser's existence, that appears to be established - for the notability of Lesser and the accuracy of the information in the article, I may well change my mind. Others may too. Sorry, uploading to the Commons isn't in my area of expertise. I must look into it, as I have a photo to upload. Peridon (talk) 21:34, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalized Someone went in and removed all of my uploads, including the upload from the Los Angeles Public County Records the Commendation by the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors, confirming much of the information in the article. Also, one of those pushing for deleting this article as a hoax was blocked. What is going on here? How can an image from public records be deleted without explanation, and why are all of the sources I put in disappearing? There does appear to be a a hoax, but it is not by me! I spent my own money for this stuff, from the government (and LA Times), to upload it (or cite from it), now it is all deleted without explanation or any notice that it was being deleted. I did not even get a single notice regarding the PUBLIC RECORD Commendation Image being deleted, and there is no discussion on the talk page of edits. Someone smelled a hoax at the top of this page, but the hoax seems to be coming from somewhere else. Why sneek around deleting public record information? Why have a talk page if you are not going to use it. When the New York Times and Los Angeles Times run articles about how notable Louis Lesser is, and he is STILL called a hoax, and I paid my own money to get the articles, and public record information is vandalized, and Wikipedia editors do not follow their own talk page guidelines, and all of this is done in secrecy, I give up. HkFnsNGA (talk) 19:34, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You uploaded a large set of document images to Commons claiming you held the copyright to them. Just scanning or photographing a document doesn't give you any copyright rights, and you can't give any permission to anyone else to use them. If you'd uploaded content from the LA Times that the paper was selling, that's also a clear copyright violation; buying a copy of a text doesn't give any right to republish it (just try doing that with your Kindle copy of Going Rogue). You really, very badly, should review WP:NFCC and related policy and guideline pages. It's also not generally appropriate to insert images of the (primary) sources you're referencing into the article itself. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 19:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you delete the image of the public record of the Special Commendation from the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors, which lists notable and historic achievements of Louis Lesser? And the references included a signature by Arthur Anderson himself, in a PUBLIC document prepared for listing on the American Stock Exchange. What is wrong with citing this document, and stating that it is the source? The fact that Louis Lesser Enterprises made the claims in its public document, is itself a fact. I changed the wording to state that the claims were made in the Annual REport, not by a newspaper. The Annual REport for the SEC is where the newspapers get their information, so is more primary, and I worded the article so that I said that the information is "according to the annual report signed by Arthur Anderson", or something like that. What Wikipedia guideline does this violate? It is standard in scholarly and academic research to cite a company's own words in public reports, not as facts, but as a claims to facts made by the company. Furthermore, there are historic photographs in the public annual report made for the SEC. It is NOT copyrighted, and you deleted it as a copyright violation, without bothering to notify me. HkFnsNGA (talk) 20:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did't delete anything. I raised the issues related to improper copyright tagging at Commons, and an administrator there deleted the images in question. You can't just create images of documents then upload them claiming to control the copyrights, because you don't control the copyrights. You need to show that the images meet Wikpedia's requirements for the use of non-free content. Public documents aren't necessarily public domain documents -- for example, when somebody sued JK Rowling over the Harry Potter books, the books went into court files as public documents -- but that didn't mean that Rowling lost the copyright to them. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 21:06, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think many originally thought this was a hoax, but I do not believe that anyone NOW thinks Louis Lesser is a hoax. Instead, I think a small handfull of editors like giving others a hard time, instead of helping them just a little. It is not required, but the TINIEST bit of help, especially with uploading the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors Commendation, and its many findings, or uploading of the 1963 Louis Lesser Enterprises, Inc. Annual Report, with its Arthur Anderson Co. wealth of information (signed by Arthur Anderson himself, certainly a reliable source if there is one) would save everyone here much time, since most claims in the article, would then be well sourced, by Arthur Anderson, and the SEC, which listed Louis Lesser Enterprises, Inc. on the American Stock Exchange. The Tiniest bit of help... I am striking my accusations of vandalism, but it seems clear that some people on this page like fighting over nothing, when a TINY bit of help would end ANY controversy, and it is clear that some take pleasure in making others do meaningless work for no reason, and then fighting over a tehcnicality, when the content could easilty be indisputable, but for the tiniest help to someone who does not know technical details of Wikipedia.

As the nominator, I am changing my position to neutral as my original rationale for deletion as a hoax is no longer valid in light of changes made to the article since the nomination. However, I do believe there is still a lingering question over whether the subject qualifies under WP:N that needs to be addressed. I'm going to remain on the fence in that debate, as I believe this individual is borderline. KuyaBriBri^Talk 22:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

keep I think the article is now sufficiently documented. It still remains in a style that is usually considered promotional, and that continues to some extent to influence a reader's first impression of the reliability. The next step is to remove the adjectives and terms of praise, following the advice in WP:PEACOCK. We say something is important by saying what it is, not by using words like "pioneering. whatever, and "many historic figures". I think it's unfortunate that the attempt at showing the significance managed to be so over-extended as to give an opposite impression. the style for a Wikipedia article is what is expected of an encyclopedia: plain , dull, and descriptive. If I have time tomorrow morning, I'll indicate this more clearly, by reworking some of it. DGG ( talk ) 06:56, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will follow your lead if you make the first couple of changes. You can leave my boldface joke in the Phillips Ranch section after the opium den. The information is exactly accurate, but I am not sure jokes are appropriate, and a rewording may be appropriate. You might call the wording WP:ANTI-Peacock. I am not sure I am so impressed by some of the business dealings listed on the talk page, but they should stay there until reliably sourced. HkFnsNGA (talk) 07:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

V Weak keep if trimmed considerably. There seem to be very few distinct references, almost all come down to 3 very old articles in the LA times that are repeated ad nauseam and that are locked so they are hard to check. Lesser may be worth 1/2 a page but not this much detail. (in short, we need lesser Lesser) NBeale (talk) 14:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[Request of User:KuyaBriBri moved to this page for comments of others if I am still doing it wrong]

[editing Section moved here for comments from others if I am still doing it wrong]

Keep This is a real person, who got significant media coverage for his work. If there is anything in the article that someone doubts the accuracy of, tag it and discuss on the talk page. Dream Focus 17:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I deleted unsourced things as best as I could, and I added these reliabel sources instead -

1. LA Times, December 17, 1950, “Active Week Puts Tract’s Sales Past $3,750,000”
2. LA Times, October 9, 1954, “Subpoena in Quiz Faced by Builder”
3. Los Angeles Times, Feb 10, 1957
4. LA Times, August 3, 1958 “Overseas Unit of Constructino Company Set”
5. LA Times, October 3, 1958
6. Los Angeles Times, October 25, 1959
7. LA Times, March 13, 1960,
8. Los Angeles Times, January 16, 1961
9. Los Angeles Times, March 26, 1961
10. Los Angles County Board of Supervisors, Resolution, April 9, 1961
11. Los Angeles Times, Oct 15, 1961
12. Los Angeles Times, November 15, 1961 “Board Asks Full Study of Shelters”
13. Los Angeles Times, December 3, 1961 “Businessman Appointed to CD Group”
14. New York Times, September 23, 1962
15. LA Times, March 3, 1963
16. New York Times, March 16, 1963
17. Arthur Anderson, Arthur Anderson Co., Audit of Louis Lesser Enterprises, September 13, 1963
18. LA Times, September 22, 1963
19. Los Angeles Times, November 15, 1964
20. LA Times, September 18, 1966
21. LA Times, February 27, 1970
22. LA Times, Septemeber 20, 1970, Al Delugach, “Morris Shenker: The Money Mover”
Even new sources put in article

many major newspapers in 20 years added, all for different things. This shuold show Louis Lesser is not a "hoax" and is "notable" HkFnsNGA (talk) 20:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is an awful article, but the sources provided establish notability. Alansohn (talk) 02:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Huge number of reliable sources indicate this is a notable subject. The aticle needs a lot of work but is interesting and rescuable. I can help improve it if it survives AFD. <>Multi‑Xfer<> (talk) 04:38, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My current position is Neutral following rewrite by creator and confusion on my part as to what the heck is going on here.... The article is looking more reasonable, but I'm still a bit worried about where all the junk came from. Why should there be so much stuff that smacks of Walter Mitty or blame shifting or whatever? Peridon (talk) 11:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Walter Mitty has a Wikipedia article, and would be an amateur compared to Lesser if Lesser is a hoax! User:Peridon, more seriously, what have you found on the Tri National stuff, and could you add what you found to the Lesser article for others to expand on? I can not figure any of it out, except that something very fishy went on, possibly fishy enough to merit an enire Wiki article on Tri National Development alone. HkFnsNGA (talk) 18:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should be at home tomorrow. Will look again if I am. (The office will ring me at 9.00 now to go to London...) Peridon (talk) 21:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The subject is clearly notable and very well documented, far more so than many who have survived AfD challenges and remain on Wikipedia. --MelanieN (talk) 17:28, 29 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]
Alright, I don't think I've ever reconsidered my vote twice in one AFD before, but here you go: Keep this article. Again, I appreciate the work the creator has put into this article to address the concerns voiced here, but it definitely needs some clean-up by someone further removed from the subject. The creator is, at the very least, an admirer.--Atlan (talk) 00:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.