Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geoffrey Shindler

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, defaulting to keep. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geoffrey Shindler

Geoffrey Shindler (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Seems to me the criteria for notability aren't met here. He's a lawyer, not a judge etc. Involved in some professional bodies but not in a capacity that would make him known outside his profession Lurker ^oi! 14:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Agent 86 19:59, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• Weak delete. I turned up this article he co-wrote for the The Independent but it's more about his brother the film producer than him. He also appears in this BBC article but only giving generic legal advice that any lawyer could have given. All the rest seems to be short announcements related to comings and goings in the legal business, mostly in trade sources. Demiurge 20:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I don't have too much time for him personally, but even I have to admit that he is one of the world's leading specialists in trust law (admittedly, not a subject that exactly quickens the pulse). And he is president of STEP which is the leading international body in the field. Through STEP he does wield quite a lot of influence in a number of countries in relation to legislative developments in this field - he has played quite a role in relation to the new EU regulations for the trust industry. Admittedly the article is not very good, and reads like an ego trip, but I'd suggest putting an appropriate tag on it and keeping it. Legis 08:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep. Article isn't very good and is unsourced, and seems to have been put here by someone spamming the firm (which article was quite rightly speedied). On the positive side he is notable in the industry and a major player in STEP. I agree with Legis: tag it and let it stand. AndyJones 09:00, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. As founding member and president of STEP, he appears to meet WP:BIO as having made widely recognized contributions that are part of the enduring historical record in his specific field. -Kubigula (ave) 04:31, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete. Questionable on passing WP:BIO in my view. If there was a bunch of reliable third-party coverage of him and his work, I'd tip over to keep. But as is I don't see this person as notable enough for an article at this time. Fairsing 03:24, 1 December 2006 (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.