Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Deutsch: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
E.M.Gregory (talk | contribs) k |
|||
Line 13:
*'''Keep''', albeit with some reluctance. (I was the one who said the above quote and brought this to ANI originally... and maybe I'll regret this !vote if the POV-pushing edit war continues eternally.) Deutsch doesn't qualify as a [[Wikipedia:Who is a low-profile individual|low-profile individual]] - he's self-promoted himself, he's written books & done book signing & self-promotion events, etc. So while his "normal" journalism career is of no importance as far as sources are concerned, his work as an author is of borderline notability, and the scandal was large and long-running enough as to not be a [[WP:BLP1E]] issue. (It also involved more than just the book... it also tainted the journalism career, with editor's notes and redactions being made retroactively to articles he wrote. So the SCANDAL was notable if not the career itself.) The fact that the scandal originally broke in March 2017, and has kept rolling since then with things like [http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/inside-the-fake-news-story-no-ones-talking-about-w475648 this April 2017 Rolling Stone article] or [https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/a-journalist-on-the-crime-beat-becomes-the-subject-of-some-skeptical-journalism/2017/09/15/c5139096-9711-11e7-82e4-f1076f6d6152_story.html this September 2017 Washington Post story], which are willing to make comparisons with notable-for-the-wrong-reasons journalists like [[Jayson Blair]], also shows that the issue has legs. [[User:SnowFire|SnowFire]] ([[User talk:SnowFire|talk]]) 13:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
*'''Keep''', Snowfire has pegged this one exactly.[[User:E.M.Gregory|E.M.Gregory]] ([[User talk:E.M.Gregory|talk]]) 15:23, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
As the original article creator, I recall that the rationale for approval of the article initially was fact that Deutsch's books are carried in multiple libraries he and has written high profile stories for major pubs. If he was notable enough for inclusion then, he probably is now. That being said, I have concerns about what appear to be pretty transparent attempts to harm subject's reputation through excising of neutrality from article. I think the admins must make the final call here.
| |||