Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seth Asher

Add links
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 Delete. Keep !votes, even if they're not socks (which I highly doubt) do not address policy-based concerns presented by delete !votes: namely, WP:BIO and WP:RS. Article clearly fails both policies. -- Merope 13:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seth Asher[edit]


Seth Asher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non-notable broker, despite all of the hyperbole. The links don't link to anything which prove his notability. "Seth Asher" only gets 133 Google hits, and that's for everybody with that name. myloanmarket.com is his website, this reads liks spam. Corvus cornix 23:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    • Comment I am not sure why Melgomac didn't rebut this here, and I am totally new at this so I don't know if there's a reason not to put it right underneath, but here's the rebuttal, which I agree with: If you search for Seth Asher in quotes, you get 500-something results, not 133 as Corvus cornix wrote. The industry in question is notorious for spam I am sure (I get enough junk in the mail about it to attest to that), and indeed the website in question does sell things, but, I don't see anything wrong with that or the relevancy of that to this specific encyclopaedic listing. If you try to Google search for those words cited below that are apparently important for the industry (beverly hills mortgage, los angeles mortgage broker, and so on), this site comes up literally first and not on the pay advertisement space. AnnenbergCommunicationsMaster 20:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC) — AnnenbergCommunicationsMaster (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete. Total vanity PR piece, fails WP:BIO. The only remotely proper reference is a Forbes article that only mentions Asher in passing in one sentence. Nothing else here is sourced, including spammy BS like "best known for the introduction of a groundbreaking internet technology reducing consumers' costs for mortgages" and "He's been linked indirectly in business to actors Jack Black and Matthew Perry". wikipediatrix 00:13, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment There was a Forbes reference, a CNBC reference, two seperate NPR (National Public Radio) references that are both a transcript of an interview an a playable audio file, an MSNBC print media reference, a Houston Chronicle reference, a Boston Globe reference, as well as a PRNewsire reference that collectively cited those citations in itself, but most were removed by Leuko. I don't know why one of the users here would delete those, but I would like to see them back, and, to wit, I think it would be a major improvement if this had some references to the television claims. AnnenbergCommunicationsMaster 20:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC) — AnnenbergCommunicationsMaster (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
      • They were removed because press releases are not appropriate references because they are written by the subject to promote themselves. The Forbes reference was removed because it was merely a reprint of a press release. While the CNBC reference is a WP:RS, it really has nothing to do with Seth Asher. He has a one line quote, which is not the type of non-trivial coverage that WP:BIO requires. Leuko 01:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Absolutley incorrect. There were two Forbes articles with mentions of Asher recently. One was a non-press release Forbes article about the mortgage industry, and the other Forbes was indeed a press release from Asher's company. Here is the non-press release Forbes article:

[1] And here is the press release: [2] Please also respond, Leuko, as to why it is proper for you to recommend deletion of an article yet proceed to edit its contents, and specifically its links to sources -- the very sources of which you and/or others claim it does not have enough! It appears to be improper, or at least an apparent inappropriate dicotomy. In other words, while you condone the elimination of this Wiki's very existence, you also are simultaneously proceeding to hone its existence to your liking. It is inconsistent, and appears to make you lack conviction in your belief that it should be deleted. I acknowledge that I may have missed something in this interpretation of your seemingly contradictory actions, but it does not appear so prima facie.AnnenbergCommunicationsMaster 00:18, 15 September 2007 (EDT)

  • Comment Having read the entire Forbes article that is not the press release, there is more than one direct quote from Asher, contradicting Luek's "he has a one-line quote." Additionally, other than the quotations, both he and his company are referred throughout the article, and actually form a basis for the entire article.64.195.124.243 04:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC) — 64.195.124.243 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Comment I'm afraid I can't agree that Seth Archer and the company for whom he works form the basis for the entire article, for the very same reason that I disagree that he and OlympiaWest Mortgage Group are mentioned throughout. In fact, the first mention of Archer occurs in the eleventh paragraph of what is a 24 paragraph article. Moreover, he is not referred to again until the two closing paragraphs. OlympiaWest is mentioned only once, as a reference to the firm at which Asher works - a firm not mentioned in the Seth Archer article. That said, I do recognize that Archer contributed more than a one line quote - in fact, he provided three sentences. In this way, he barely surpasses the other three individuals who are quoted in the piece. Victoriagirl 17:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wow, it doesn't get much more blatantly inaccurate than this. GlassCobra 00:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Strong/WP:SNOW delete per above and below. An apparent WP:AUTO WP:COI. Leuko 20:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The product of a single purpose account, which was also responsible for this and this. Victoriagirl 03:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 03:53, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I heard Seth Asher on NPR Marketplace while driving in Florida and consider myself a reference. All of the above deletion comments are questionable. This is a good piece and shouldn't be deleted. Theonething 14:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC) — Theonething (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
    • Comment Wikipedia users, whether single purpose accounts or not, cannot be considered references. If Asher was indeed featured on NPR, a program name and date (both verifiabe) are required. This in itself is not enough to meet notability guidelines, but it is a start. I see no questionable comments amongst those cited. Victoriagirl 15:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Not sure where to start because so much of what was commented is totally refutable. First off, in response to user Victoriagirl, who says in response to user Theonething's keep entry that "I see no questionable comments amongst those cited," the most obvious questionable delete entry is Leuko's "Wow, it doesn't get much more blatantly inaccurate than this." What is inaccurate? No one refuted the accuracy of anything in the Asher wiki entry, but rather questioned the sources. Secondly, several users have called my account a single purpose account, which is patently false -- Victoriagirl makes that claim, and in the same sentence cites multiple other entries from my acount: Beatlemania (musical), the off-broadway musical from the late 1970s, as well as well as the Haddon Gazette, a 20th century newspaper that existed for almost 90 years in Asher's hometown. This is a clear self-contradiction within Victoriagirl's own claim. Additionally, user Corvus cornix makes the incorrect claim that 133 google hits result from a search for Seth Asher. The actual number is 550 when searched in quotes as "seth asher," and you'll note that often Asher has been cited with merely his last name or first initial and last name. You'll also note that MyLoanMarket.com is the first organic entry showing up in google results for some of the most salient search terms pertaining to its industry: beverly hills mortgage, los angeles mortgage broker, etc. In response to user Wikipediatrix, seconded by user GlassCobra, that no sources are cited other than Forbes, that is false, as they appear to have have not read the entire entry -- two National Public Radio links to Kai Ryssdal's report is given within the entry, both a transcript and MP3 audio of his nationally-broadcast interview. Further, there is also a Associated Press - Dow Jones Newsires link to a story with a reference to him. I will attempt to give an abridged list here of more sources, and also update the source list on the entry: CNBC: [3] CNBC/MSNBC: [4] Additionally, PRnewsire is a company that has existed for more than 50 years, with a more than solid reputation...they will not put a release accross the wires that without doing fact-checking. In this news release [5] references are made to Seth Asher in the Boston Globe, Houston Chronicle, KTLA TV news, NPR's marketplace with Kai Ryssal, CNBC and so on. Melgomac 15:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC) — Melgomac (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
    • Comment: I actually didn't say that, I said "Delete per above," by which I meant everything above, not just the comment immediately above. And I would support the characterization as an WP:SPA, since 75% of edits are to this article, and 100% of edits have to do with this person. Finally, a one-line trivial quote from CNBC does not satisfy the multiple, non-trivial mentions required by WP:BIO. Leuko 19:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC) Addendum: "SOURCE MyLoanMarket.com" is exactly why press releases written by the company/people they wish to promote are not acceptable WP:RS to satisfy WP:BIO. Leuko 20:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment I stand by my observation that this article is the product of a singe purpose account. With all due respect, Melgomac, your edit history matches the the definition of a single purpose account: "a user account which appears to be used for edits in one article only, or a small range of often-related articles." As evidence, I cited two edits above. The first concerns Beatlemania, to which you added the sentence "Robert Rabinowitz, brother of Jay Rabinowitz, first-cousin once removed of Seth Asher, provided editorial content" over the course of three edits. My second example was not the Haddon Gazette, as you claim, rather it was an edit you made to Haddon, New Jersey, to which you added the following under "Noted residents": "*Seth Asher (1975-), Financier, Media Personality, Entrepreneur, attended Haddonfield public schools through age 17, when he headed to the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania." I fail to see my examples as a self-contradiction. I will acknowledge, however, that you did indeed create the Haddon, New Jersey article - and I recognize the edits you perfomed on same as two of 41 which do not concern Seth Asher. Victoriagirl 20:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I just read over every word in this Wikipedia reference, and everything in this "up for deletion discussion." I am troubled and a little saddened that a lot of the comments seem to be vitriolic. I am new to the Wiki world, but this seems like a more-or-less valuable encyclopedic entry. I studied communications, and split my time between the East Coast and West Coast and center-states working in the communications field, so I know our culture; not everything in an encyclopedia is germane to every reader, but recognizing this fellow from the local news in Los Angeles myself, and having listened to the NPR snippet referenced in the entry(I love NPR, but I'm not a big Marketplace fan), I have to say I think I would want my students to be able to look up who this fellow is. It seems it would be a real pity if it were removed. Wikipedia is a beautiful concept, and I want it to contain references to all people, places, things, and concepts in the media and in our universe, especially those that appear numerous times in the media. Ideally, I would like to see some actual links to the TV news I've seen, but I wouldn't know where to find those. Finally, the original author rebuts 'comments' and 'delete' discussion reasonably well, but I wish those were directly under the comments; if it's all the same to everyone here, I'd like to copy and paste those directly underneath where they are relevant so they flow better.AnnenbergCommunicationsMaster 18:18, 14 September 2007 (UTC) — AnnenbergCommunicationsMaster (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Addendum: Added multiple links to videos from network broadcast television (KTLA television news, channel 5, in Los Angeles) and other articles on the web. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnenbergCommunicationsMaster (talk • contribs) 14:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I Seth Asher has been in the news recently, representing both his company and his views on the current subprime debacle (August & September 2007). My measure: Is Seth Asher is an individual with influence, presence, or achievements that are beyond the mean and of interest to the world at large? Seth's credentials are no different from any other successful ivy league grad (Harvard, Goldman Sachs), the standout is that his opinions are being sought by multiple reputable media sources - most recently Forbes and NPR. A run in the news is a reasonable indicator that the individual has opinions that are credible or at a minimum provide insights into contemporary topics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.89.167 (talk) 04:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I have been following this discussion with interest - so far, I feel that there is benefit in having a Seth Asher page in that it gives us the chance to understand the background of a man with an increasing media presence. Before making further comment, I will create an account so I can do so without anonymity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.89.167 (talk) 02:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC) — 207.237.89.167 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Keep If it could be condensed somewhat, which is I am sure possible, I am a proponent of keeping this article. I think the photograph should be changed, or eliminated, as it doesn't add any value. I was on the fence until I read through this exchange. If someone's in the various news channels several times as an "expert," that makes them "notable" in my mind and I want to be able look such a person up in Wikipedia to find out what the story is about him or her.Hbomb phd mom 04:05, 17 September 2007 (UTC) — Hbomb phd mom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Comment: Please see WP:BIO notability inclusion criteria. Being on the local news for a minute as someone who was available does not satify these criteria, as this person is not the subject of the interview. Replace him with any other random mortgage broker and no one would notice the difference, hence not notable. Leuko 18:49, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Not buying what you are saying Leuko...did you mean to imply this figure has only been on the local news for a minute? He was on the local news multiple times, within weeks of the previous reports, so the news desks would not have reached out randomly the successive times but the desks would have been intentionally looking for this figure. And he was in the national news multiple times, in different media types all; just doesn't fit the bill for random. I am not in accord with the _totally random_ argument you make at all as much as I try to see your point of view, as your tenets are a gross exaggeration at the very best. Do you realize how many of these brokers there are out there? News teams, especially NPR, Forbes, Associated Press, Dow Jones, don't hit the same broker 4, 5, 6 times in a row totally randomly. They obviously go to reliable sources.64.52.12.82 00:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC) — 64.52.12.82 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Comment Assuming in good faith that you are a new user, 64.52.12.82, I respectfully recommend that you consult Wikipedia's notability guidelines. I have yet to see references indicating that Asher has "been the subject of published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject"; just one of the criteria through which the subject might be considered notable. Failing this, we might fall back on the sentence that follows: "If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may need to be cited to establish notability." However, even here sources fail us. Simply put, we have yet to find a single pubished source in which Asher features as the subject, rather we have three minor references: a two minute NPR phone interview regarding Countrywide, a two minute local television news report on mortages (in which Asher features for less than thirty seconds), and an Associated Press story (published on the Forbes website and elsewhere) in which he is one of four persons quoted. Again, as it stands, the subject fails WP:BIO. Victoriagirl 01:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC) Note: While writing the comment above, a corrected video link was provided by 64.52.12.82. Broadcast by the same local television station mentioned above, it would seem to feature Asher for all of fifteen or sixteen seconds. The subject is declining real estate values. Victoriagirl 01:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I lend money, I know the business, and I hadn't heard of this cat but I realized that doesn't mean anything cuz when I read about what he's been on, I was like, I need to know about him. It's like if you weigh both sides of this thing, keeps definitely win. Deletes started out OK based on an initial lack of references, but they were all cocky and rash and dismissive and then it just went downhill for them. It's like now they look like snappers to judgement, especially with the "obviously vanity" and "pure PR" stuff, and it was like they kept digging deeper and each their points would get proven wrong; still needs some more refs to make me all totally warm and fuzzy, but they are basically there now and the deletes gotta bow. The only thing obvious now is that if there's someone on the news a lot, people should have some way to look up who the heck that cat is in an online encyclopedia. That was the best point I read on here. I searched for jumbo mortgage broker on google, and guess which cat's company came up first? This one, out of 1,320,000 pages. Anyway, I'm sorry deletes, but I gotta call it...this one's a total no-brainer, keeps prevail.Wutuplendnowaneva 06:20, 17 September 2007 (UTC) — Wutuplendnowaneva (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Delete. Suspect a practical joke, considering the inclusion of sentences such as a "second-cousin" of a "former Chief Justice" and judging by the flurry of new users suddenly coming out of the woodwork in support. Should have been speedied, IMO. The subject lacks all traces of notability. Delete per WP:NOT#SOAPBOX Self-promotion: two chance mentions in media, one after a random call by a local radio station host who in his own words "went looking for a mortgage broker to talk to", and one mention in an article where he is "her broker", the "she" of the text being a non-notable, random individual chosen to demonstrate how the credit market has tightened, does not even begin to fulfill WP:NOTABILITY criteria. Pia 09:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as nn vanity piece. --Finngall talk 20:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Please see WP:DUCK. Also, you are not supposed to use multiple user accounts as meatpuppets in community discussions. Leuko 02:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I added another reference which was at least an hour-long radio news/talk guest-appearance with Asher on Sunday, September 9, 2007. I don't remember the exact time, but it was early morning on that Sunday, and many people called in. This was not an infomercial or advertisement...it was part of Sunday Edition: the Nelson Salsa and Socorro Serrano show, which I think airs from 3 am - 7 am on Sundays. KLSX 97.1 is a high-powered and widely-recognized radio station here in Los Angeles. I listened to Asher, Salsa, and Serrano debate, agree, and take calls for about 15 minutes in the beginning of the hour, did some other things, then turned it back on and listed for a little while as the show ended and led in to the next show in the lineup. They repeatedly referred to him as an expert in both real estate, mortgages, and so on. I have searched on the web for the audio, but I have not been successful finding it. If anyone can locate the audio for KLSX for that Sunday, it would be valuable for this discussion.Hbomb phd mom 22:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC) — Hbomb phd mom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
I have removed this, as it can not be verified, and no WP:RS was provided. And it doesn't sound as though it was actually about the subject, so it really wouldn't help with WP:BIO anyways. Leuko 23:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Dear Leuko, was that the right protocol for you to edit my Keep suggestion? You struck through my word "Keep," which was the first word in my entry. I don't wish to have it struck through.Hbomb phd mom 01:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Like I said in the edit summary, you can only "vote" once. Leuko 02:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't agree that I have contributed to a few or no other topics outside this one. How can that tag be removed from this discussion from where my username appears? It's irritating, and inaccurate. I contributed to a very diverse number of Wikipedia sections. Also, I heard this radio broadcast above, and there is as of now no way to prove that it did not occur and get heard by hundreds of thousands of people, and I suspect shortly someone will come up with a verifiable reference to it...I am just not aware of a recording on the internet where we can point right now. Therefore, it seems since we are supposed to assume good faith, you should assume that I did hear it when I say I did. And since the Wikipedia citation guideline is only a guideline, and not a rule (and it specifically emphasizes that here verified), the reference deletion should be undone. I understand I can go back in to the entry and do that myself, but I am politely asking Leuko to do so for us in an exercise of good faith.Hbomb phd mom 01:47, 19 September 2007 (UTC) — Hbomb phd mom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  • Comment: It's not inaccurate - a majority of edits are to this article/afd or related. As there is no way for an independent WP editor to verify the presence or content of the alleged radio broadcast, it really shouldn't be included. Leuko 02:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep At this point, I am strongly in favor keeping this article, as it seems there is too weighty influence of a few negative discussion contributors that are not valid, and I passionately support keeping it because of its inherent value. Also, in this discussion, I would like to fully address the "undo" of the citation removal for a radio broadcast on KLSX (Sunday Edition with Nelson Salsa and Socorro Serrano and Seth Asher), that Leuko had inappropriately removed according to Wiki guidelines and policies. The site for KLSX streams audio of all their broadcasts, including this one as it occurred, but only archives some of them. Nevertheless, that is still a source this broadcast, and since it is our guideline to assume good faith, I am placing it back on.Hbomb phd mom 02:43, 19 September 2007 (UTC) — Hbomb phd mom (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Comment: WP:V is the cardinal WP policy (along with WP:NOR and WP:RS), and it is not superseded by whatever weird interpretation of WP:AGF that is. Assuming good faith does not mean condoning the addition of unverifiable information. Leuko 02:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and above. Lacks proper sources, fails inclusion criteria. -- Ned Scott 03:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per nom non-notable. Dureo 11:19, 19 September 2007 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Seth_Asher&oldid=1138757203"