Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Brizel

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 delete. Sandstein 08:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Brizel

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

Article was created by Brizel. No reliable, independent sources to show notability. Comatmebro (talk) 06:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete only sources are a boxing site with which Brizel seems to be connected, WP itself, and Brizel's own site (which was multiply listed under Ext links, have cleaned up). Hence no RS. Apparent CoI also. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Chiswick Chap and Comatmebro. All the sources point back to the same site. Does not meet WP:Notability. Iglooflame (talk) 06:53, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:51, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The topic appears to fail WP:GNG at this time. After performing searches using various criteria, such as ""Robert Brizel", boxing", ""Robert Brizel" writer", "Robert Brizel" boxing writer" and others, just not finding coverage in third-party reliable sources. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not delete! Presently I am one of Wikipedia's principal boxing writers and photographic contributors in the public domain. Many of the Saddoboxing stories I write are written specifically to provide Wikipedia references on boxers when no other information is available. My internet boxing site gets millions of hits a day, my claim to fame. In another smile of stupidity, some Wikipedia dodos deleted my Henry Hascup (boxing historian) entry today, accusing of copyright infringement of my own article on Saddoboxing! On my own site! In fact Wiki was written first, and the Saddoboxing article on Henry Hascup was written later to support it. You might have at least waited till I got back from reporting on the Golden Gloves before you attacked my bio credibility, as well as my Wiki references, articles which I wrote on my own site specifically to create Wiki references.....Robert

Robert, I am sorry you have to face this, but as you probably know, the problem is that to have a Wikipedia article, you need to meet the threshold of "notability" (WP:GNG - "the general notability guideline"). But basically this means unless we can find significant independent sources reporting on a subject (i.e., newspapers, books, scholarly articles, encyclopedias, etc.), the subject is unlikely to survive a deletion discussion. You can write about youself on your userpage a bit if you wanted though, at User:Cocoruff, which you have yet to create. BTW, since you write about boxing, if you know of any public domain images of Jacob Hyer, I'd love to get one on that article. Cheers.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 02:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, since you write about boxing, if you know of any public domain images of Jacob Hyer, I'd love to get one on that article. Cheers.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 02:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jacob Hyer Images and Drawings exist. If only the Wiki people weren't so anxious to delete my entry on the world famous boxing historian who has them, maybe I could have provided them....Robert

Comment – (Copied/pasted from my user talk page): Unfortunately, Wikipedia's guidelines regarding topic notability don't appear to have been met regarding the Robert Brizel article. Please refer to Wikipedia's General notability guideline, which is Wikipedia's primary notability guideline. It's nothing personal whatsoever, and the topic has merit in terms of being about a boxing writer. It's just that Wikipedia has these policies in place to establish criteria for what constitutes topic notability for inclusion in the encyclopedia.

If you could provide reliable sources for the topic, please do so in the AfD discussion and add them to the article, which will help to establish notability for the topic in terms of Wikipedia's notability policies. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:40, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source References Provided for Robert Brizel, Henry Hascup (reposted) and Joe Antonacci. The reliable source references have been provided.....................Robert

Incidentally, the so-called 'theshhold' of books, newspapers and magazines cited as a requirement is a standing joke. Famous boxing writers like Brizel write for internet sites and get millions of hits a day. Everything in boxing is now internet based. The so-called book, magazine and article boxing writers who write for print only (not the internet) were fired years ago. Those references and reporters don't exist in the boxing profession in the current digital era. Bert Sugar was moved from the front row to the back row in recent years, as the old boxing school faded from significance in favor of digital-minded boxing reporters.

Delete no reliable, independent sources of information found - the ones in the article do not meet this criteria. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:28, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG, etc. Basically, being a Wikipedia editor doesn't mean you can also have an article on yourself. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:38, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG. As stated above, reliable sources are key, especially since this is a WP:BLP. Ish dar ian 05:10, 6 April 2012 (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.