Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oren Kessler

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 No consensus. Article has improved substantially since initial nomination in a way that directly responds to the initial delete arguments. A Train^talk 07:56, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oren Kessler

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

Non-notable writer lacking non-trivial support. reddogsix (talk) 15:51, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable foreign policy expert.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:31, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep he is a notable foreign policy analyst Observerstatus

I don't see how he is notable by Wikipedia standards. Please explain how he meets WP:N or WP:BIO. reddogsix (talk) 20:34, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the sources are about the subject, they simply verify that he's been published, which is not itself enough to meet WP:BIO notability criteria. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:15, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a well-known journalist, analyst (even though the article was created by an editor now banned). Just tag for expansion, improvement.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:53, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Searching books [1] is a quick way to see that the work done by this policy analyst is taken seriously.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:27, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment While that search produces many results, I'm only seeing about a dozen books that cite Kessler, only two of which cite his analysis; the others cite his reporting from the Jerusalem Post in their footnotes. Also, I'm not convinced that being cited as a source by the likes of Glenn Beck and Robert Spencer makes one notable. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 03:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seek and ye shall find (Matthew 7:7.).E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion and citation of a writer's work by other bluelinked writers/newscasters supports notability, our opinion of their political views notwithstanding. More books did come up in my search, stuff like Political Islam and Global Media: The boundaries of religious identity, (Noha Mellor, Khalil Rinnawi, Routledge, 2016) "Oren Kessler (2012) explains that the channel is perceived as favouring freedom and democracy against dictatorships, but clearly appears to be supporting Islamic parties. Kessler demonstrates how the channel promoted the..." E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:04, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mention Beck and Spencer because of "[my] opinion of their political views" -- I mentioned them because most of what they say and write is demonstrably untrue, and being cited as a source by such charlatans ought not to be regarded as a measure of notability. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 19:11, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I did a little expand & source. I did not bring the article up to what it should and can become. There is much more material out there, of course, Kessler is a well-known and well-regarded journalist and analyst. the problem with searching for someone like this, a familiar proplem with notable people who do not yet have articles, especially analysts and writers, is that a search brings up too many sources, so many that it is hard for editors to come up with the proper keywords. I could tell instantly that he is a well-known, widely-cited, widely-interviewed foreign policy guy. figuring out where to find substantive coverage of things he has done took a little longer. But it's out there, this: [2] search, for example.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:26, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The searches done by E. M. Gregory (above) demonstrate that he is notable. Someone cited by multiple scholarly books easily qualifies. Firkin Flying Fox (talk) 08:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:45, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as all of what's listed is essentially only what expectedly comes from and with his career, but still none of it actually suggests how this can specifically substantiate his own convincing notability as an article. There can be a lot of coverage but only a specific amount can lead to his own convincing article. SwisterTwister talk 18:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
note WP:HEY Kessler article is now reliably sourced, documenting his career working for major media, and, then, as a foreign policy analyst at major think tanks Henry Jackson Society and Foundation for Defense of Democracies. His role in two incidents, Jim Clancy (journalist)'s resignation and Steven Sotloff's death led to substantial coverage of Kessler.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:35, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Having one's articles cited a few times isn't enough to be notable, and much depends on who does the citing. I do not see, in the evidence given here and in the article, an indication that this person is notable--he is not discussed as a notable person in his own right. Drmies (talk) 01:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"much depends on who does the citing"? We get that Glenn Beck is not your cup of tea, not mine either, but IDONTLIKEIT is not a policy-based reason for deletion.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:40, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note, however, that the page includes articles about Kessler in part that ran in the Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, CNN, The New York Times, The Independent and other major news osurces, I did not oversource the article, although 2 incidents in which he was centrally involved as a journalist were widely covered.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, here [3] is an article about one of these incidents Kessler by a writer for the Buenos Aires Herald who interviews him on the subject of his involvement at some length.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:52, 31 August 2016 (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.