Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Schneidermann

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 of the debate was keep. – Robert 00:34, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Daniel Schneidermann

No vote, but I would like to have some feedback here before I decide whether to delete this article on the Interlingua wikipedia. -- Dissident (Talk) 23:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

• Tentative keep. While the editing pattern surrounding this article (particularly the dumps to other wikis of a basic stub) do look rather like astroturfing, I think the French wikipedia article (fr:Daniel Schneidermann) looks like he's sufficiently notable (writing for two very notable newspapers, appearing on TV, a number of books published). That said, I'd feel more confortable if a proper French-speaking wikipedian could verify my understanding of the FR version. I'd certainly suggest this article have the "FR wikipedia has better article on this subject" tag on its takpage. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 23:48, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
• weak delete its very hard to say since neither the article nor any of its sources give any actual indication as to who this guy is. therefore, delete as unverified. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 00:01, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep the article needs expanding, great google search[1], plus imdb has a little bit on him[2]. And the french article looks good.Eivind^speak! 00:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I would think that being the television critic for a mjaor newspaper like Le Monde (for a decade or so) and publishing nine books [3] would qualify him as notable, even though he's no Air Force Amy. Monicasdude 00:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per Monicasdude. Capitalistroadster 04:20, 17 March 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.