Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen T. Owens
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. MBisanz talk 00:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Stephen T. Owens (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
The CV of a lawyer with some big cases. No sources, but even examining good sources [1] there's nothing encyclopedic here as far as I can see. Contested prod by IP. Scott Mac (Doc) 13:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
KeepDelete (per last comment) The guy's all over Google! He's certainly notable. The article does read like a CV though and needs to be cleaned up, possibly to a stub. He seems to be an extremely well known lawyer, and is certainly notable. Antivenin 14:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]- Google counting, even when done properly is no substitute for an argument based on reason and sources. Why do you say he's notable, and what source are you using for evidence.--Scott Mac (Doc) 14:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, okay. I'll explain why he's notable. He's referenced in the LA Times, on a famous case. He worked on a case featured on PrimeTime Live which was also talked about in numerous journals. He received the John Minor Wisdom Award for Professionalism and Public Service and the President's Pro Bono Service Award. That's why I think he's notable. Of course, I might very well be wrong. Antivenin 14:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Any case that hits the news, might feature a quote from a lawyer - if they profiled him, that'd be different. he worked on a case that was talked about? But was he talked about? The awards might make him notable - but then, are they particularly notable? I don't know that one.--Scott Mac (Doc) 14:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- After reviewing this further, I have my doubts too. Because the awards were given to him so far back, I can't find any valid references to the award, besides on profiles he's created himself. So as of now it fails WP:V. Antivenin 14:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Any case that hits the news, might feature a quote from a lawyer - if they profiled him, that'd be different. he worked on a case that was talked about? But was he talked about? The awards might make him notable - but then, are they particularly notable? I don't know that one.--Scott Mac (Doc) 14:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, okay. I'll explain why he's notable. He's referenced in the LA Times, on a famous case. He worked on a case featured on PrimeTime Live which was also talked about in numerous journals. He received the John Minor Wisdom Award for Professionalism and Public Service and the President's Pro Bono Service Award. That's why I think he's notable. Of course, I might very well be wrong. Antivenin 14:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Google counting, even when done properly is no substitute for an argument based on reason and sources. Why do you say he's notable, and what source are you using for evidence.--Scott Mac (Doc) 14:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | Talk 00:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unable to find any third-party, reliable sources that discuss the topic in a non-trivial way. -Atmoz (talk) 01:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Very notable. He is an award winning trial lawyer with many articles written about him. He is referred to in many more articles. Esasus (talk) 22:33, 3 April 2009 (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.