Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irv Weinstein

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 CANCELLED. Nominated by and being run by a bunch of sockpuppets (almost all the deleters are now indef blocked). -Splash - tk 21:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irv Weinstein

Not notable. To quote WP:BIO: Notable actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions. All the Google hits about Irv Weinstein are all in pages about the Buffalo, New York area where he appeared on TV. He apparently has done no national television work and would fail the "well-known television production" rule, since he only appeared there. All local TV personalities unless they have been on national or international broadcasts or have some done some other work to make them notable sould be deleted because they are just cruft. A short bio on the TV station page is enough. Love, Travel Plaza Babes 19:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, he's not some two-bit reporter who was on for five years and vanished. He's extremely well-known in both the Buffalo and Toronto areas. Kirjtc2 19:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as somebody who grew up in Toronto, Irv was a fixture on the news for the Buffalo, and southwestern Ontario area, and was part of the longest running anchor team. That sets him apart from the run of the mill TV news anchors. -- Whpq 20:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Part of the longest running anchor team in the history of television. That in itself is notable, in addition to the iconic factor in Western New York and Southern Ontario. Snickerdo 20:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He's notable enough. Travislangley 21:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He seems well-known and respected in his home area. He further established notability by breaking longevity records. SliceNYC 21:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Just because he is supposedly well known in one city doesn't mean anything. It isn't like the guy ever appeared on TV anywhere else. Smells of cruft and a WP:BIO violation. Kramden4700 21:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom and as per Kramden4700. Degree of celebrity is too localized, parochial and minor. Fails WP:BIO. Bwithh 22:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 100% pure cruft. This guy isn't Al Roker or Ted Koppel, just some guy who wasn't good enough to leave local TV to get a network TV job where he may actually have become a notable person, someone notable enought to meet the WP:BIO standards. Adam 1212 02:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom, Kramden4700, and Bwithh. Being "extremely well-known in both the Buffalo and Toronto areas" and "well-known and respected in his home area" are really meaningless in the greater scheme of things. Because he was "a fixture on the news for the Buffalo" doesn't make him notable. He was not "some two-bit reporter who was on for five years and vanished" instead he was some two-bit anchor who languished in a televison backwater because he didn't have the talent to get a network job. There are most likely at least a hundred people like him and unless they did something truly notable, like became a congressperson, mass murder, astronaut, etc. then maybe they would be of some note. Irv, you may have been good enough for Buffalo, but that is it! Cheesehead 1980 14:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wouldn't happen to know a User:Spotteddogsdotorg, would you? Kirjtc2 14:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:BIO guidelines specifically state that the criteria being applied are "not intended to be an exclusionary list; just because someone doesn't fall into one of these categories doesn't mean an article on the person should automatically be deleted". This nomination is a blind application of a guideline being interpreted as a rule without due consideration to a bolded admonition not to simply delete when the guidleines are not met. Achieving an iconic status within a locality works for me. -- Whpq 19:10, 28 July 2006 (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.