Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael F. Bachner

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. v/r - T P 13:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Michael F. Bachner

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not meet notability requirements. Yes, Bachner has represented famous people, but notability is not inherited and I do not see any in-depth reliable source coverage of Bachner himself. The sources in the article are mostly about the people he represented with a line in them mentioning the he is their attorney. Rusf10 (talk) 23:31, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 23:31, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Rusf10 (talk) 23:31, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:59, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and cleanup Well sourced.-Splinemath (talk) 17:35, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is anything but well sourced. The sources only include trivial mentions of Bachner.--Rusf10 (talk) 19:51, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep mob lawyer for whom sources exist. Wm335td (talk) 20:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a claim to notability. Where are the in-depth secondary sources?--Rusf10 (talk) 20:37, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep per my standards and WP:BARE. He wasn't bar review nor a moot court judge, nor has he served in the New York State Bar Association in any leadership capacity (I particularly note that he's not a member of its Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section, of which I am a member, and he's not even a member of its Litigation committee). Being a research assistant to a professor and an ADA are run of the mill jobs many people have done. However, he has become well-known for his representation of celebrities in NYC. In a deeper search online, I've found some references to him being involved in the past in bar association(s) and important appellate cases. Bearian (talk) 19:15, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:57, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Despite Bearian's experience and knowledge, I'm struggling to see how the subject meets general notability guidelines. He has been named in cases and worked with high profile clients, but unlike other lawyers who do both, I don't see much coverage about him specifically at this point, just passing mentions or occasional quotes. Missvain (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete reliable source references are passing mentions, he's not the focal point of any of the coverage used as sources. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:48, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 11:17, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move to draft to see if additional work can salvage the notability of the subject. BD2412 T 00:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or draftify, it does appear to be questionably over the notability line but there is significant potential for future coverage. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 01:01, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Can someone please present the significant coverage in reliable sources that we require (WP:GNG)? We do not keep articles simply because they have a lot of references or because there is a possibility that significant coverage in reliable sources will exist in the future. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 11:33, 29 January 2020 (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.