Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norman Weiss

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - kept

[edit] Norman Weiss

This article was voted for deletion once before, and the decision was made to keep it. As a historian, I spent great effort in attempting to clarify the innuendo and to flush out this entry. Nothing exists. The only pertinent information is this: Weiss and Epstein worked together on the Beatles American tours. That doesn't even need to be merged into the Beatles article; a simple edit will do, since it's a one-liner under the "history" section. Everything else in the Weiss entry are "weaselisms." Weiss may well be remembered by industry insiders; but does that constitute POV or fact? Check all the websites; his name isn't mentioned in either the Turtles or Tom Jones.

That it is well-written (thank you very much) does not preclude that this is NOT weaselism and therefore, does not belong in Wikipedia. I don't think authors often ask that their article entry be deleted. After a great deal of time and serious effort, I am reluctant, but adamant: there is nothing informative here. Nor is it likely that anyone can dig up anything substantive.

He existed. His contribution was important, but only in its proper context. allie 21:59, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Weak keep -- Jmabel | Talk 23:55, Jan 6, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, borderline notability. Megan1967 01:44, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nn business exec who was in right place at the right time and didn't do anything interesting or notable about it. Wyss 03:35, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Week keep. Encyclopedic, I guess. Don't see anything too wrong with the article. Johnleemk | Talk 11:21, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Marginal keep and allow for POV issues to be addressed. GRider\^talk 18:30, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, no evidence of notability. --fvw* 23:20, 2005 Jan 7 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. hfool/Roast me 02:52, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Marginally notable. --JuntungWu 06:37, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable out of context. Orphan, so no one will find it. Niteowlneils 20:21, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• keep Yuckfoo 04:42, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Though marginally notable, he's notable enough to be kept. --Deathphoenix 02:30, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Notable enough... Salazar 02:44, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • User joined Jan 9 2005.
• Delete, nn, removing POV reduces the article to nothing. —Ben Brockert (42) 06:10, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Very marginally notable, but notable nonetheless. bernlin2000 ∞ 22:52, Jan 11, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable and little hope for expansion. Carrp 00:12, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.