Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avi Schiffmann

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 delete. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 05:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Avi Schiffmann[edit]

[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)

The individual allegedly created a project that was popular during the coronavirus pandemic, but the coverage is not significant enough to warrant the creation of a Wikipedia page. There is one award, but I'm not too certain about the signficance of the award. Seems to fail WP:GNG requirements. Qx.est (Suufi) ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:57, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Qx.est (Suufi) ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:57, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable guy. New refs need to be added tho. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CassiJevenn (talk • contribs) 12:43, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could you elaborate on his notability? I see that you've contributed to the page in the past. A good chunk of the sources when you Google the individual (including WWF, MIT Technology Review, and the New Yorker) about him seem to be written by him or largely quotes from him which does not present significant and independent coverage. Qx.est (Suufi) ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:27, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The guy has been featured in La Voix Du Nord (1), BFMTV (2), The Times Of Israel (3), Le Figaro (4), Web Foundation (5), CNEWS (6), Business Insider (7), The Times UK (8), Vanity Fair (9), ABC ES (10) and recently, in CNN (11)... the list goes beyond... I don't know how you can doubt he is still not notable ^^ CassiJevenn (talk) 17:42, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've attached a source assessment table below. Some of the sources you listed are on the table, and the rest have the same issues. I suspect some level of churnalism is involved, if not the individual or someone close to them reaching out to media sources. The development of a popular website is not enough to warrant the creation of a Wikipedia page. Many creators of popular websites do not receive a Wikipedia page. Qx.est (Suufi) ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:51, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could you include the CNN page in the table? That recent one is very clearly not churnalism. Furthermore, Avi is not just a creator of one popular website. In the CNN article (which, for some reason, you don't include in the table), you can see all about his company and new office in SF, multiple websites created for Syria, Turkey, Ukraine, and other areas in crisis. Pretty much all the sources you use in your table are very old. There are new sources that establish notability. CraigSut (talk) 06:26, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The source assessment table generated below are from the currently posted article, not the sources listed above. That is why CNN is not included. The creation of a website or multiple does not convey notability, neither does the coverage of them. If you would like to generate your own table, please feel free. The sources I'm seeing for Schiffmann's work (including InternetActivism) tend to largely consist of direct and indirect quotes from him which isn't significant coverage. Qx.est (Suufi) ^{(talk • contribs)} 07:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then don't suggest a deletion of the page. The CNN article indicates notability for Schiffmann. Instead, add issue templates about sourcing, etc. — not about notability. As CassiJevenn said above, "new refs need to be added tho" and "I don't know how you can doubt he is still not notable." CraigSut (talk) 04:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:58, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2193300/8-17-year-old-creates-worlds-biggest-online-coronavirus-tracker/		? unsigned, churnalism?	mostly quotes	✘ No
https://www.essentiallysports.com/teenage-gamer-turns-down-8-million-for-coronavirus-tracking-website/		? moot	mostly indirect quotes	✘ No
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/03/30/the-high-schooler-who-became-a-covid-19-watchdog			majority quotes	✘ No
https://www.timesofisrael.com/updated-every-minute-17-year-old-whiz-kids-coronavirus-site-used-by-millions/			mostly quotes and filler	✘ No
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/avi-schiffmann-interview-the-teenage-tech-genius-who-built-a-coronavirus-tracking-website-78rvd093v			moot	✘ No
https://www.geekwire.com/2020/viral-sensation-seattle-kid-built-coronavirus-website-catches-eye-top-twitter-tastemaker/			? moot	? Unknown
https://www.webbyawards.com/press/press-releases/winners-announced-for-the-24th-annual-webby-awards/	awarding organization			✘ No
https://harvardindependent.com/2021/12/student-spotlights-avi-schiffman/	Student spotlight at Harvard, where Avi attends	?		✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

I suspect there may be some level of churnalism involved here as well. Qx.est (Suufi) ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:21, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete based on the source table above, it's much ado about nothing. I can't find anything else to support notability, it seems pretty clear to me. Oaktree b (talk) 15:55, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Oaktree. Obvious lack of notability and fails WP:GNG. CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:31, 29 March 2023 (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.