Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew J. Schwartzberg

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew J. Schwartzberg[edit]

Yes, he was an editor of Mad for five years, but there doesn't seem to be a single reliable source pertaining to him. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 18:22, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm sure he is/was a great guy, but the article tells us nothing about him except where he worked. (I wish WP editors would consider if they have something interesting to say about a topic before starting an article, then a lot of AfD's would be avoided.) -Steve Dufour (talk) 18:32, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete 2 sentences, being an editor of a magazine does not automatically make you notable. this isn't a mad magazine wiki. User529 (talk) 21:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Being the editor of this magazine for 5 years certainly does make one notable. Never knew that we needed something interesting to say, jsut something encyclopedic, such as the facts of someone's notable career. Indeed, there is a considerable amount of reasonable opposition to including articles about someone just because they have an amount of human interest, if there's nothing encyclopedically significant.People are, of course, welcome to write about what they themselves personally find "interesting." DGG (talk) 22:08, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that "real" encyclopedias try to make their articles interesting to potential readers. :-) Steve Dufour (talk) 03:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:N A search here doesn't show any reliable sources. There should be more context for this 3 year old stub. Artene50 (talk) 00:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per DGG's comments. This should not have been nominated for AfD. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider: The sources say only that he works for Mad. The article says only that. If a person wanted to know, "Who is Andrew J. Schwartzberg?" he should do a Google search. Even then he would have to be careful that this is the right person. If he wanted to know, "Who are the editors of Mad Magazine?" he should go directly to Mad's own website. (Or to WP's article on Mad which could have a list of editors.) The only purpose of this article is to present one fact. There is a policy not to have an article on a person known only for one thing. To me this one is even less than that. Maybe I'm missing something, but that's how it seems to me. Steve Dufour (talk) 17:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. The thing about a picture of his body being used on the cover is not a fact about him. Steve Dufour (talk) 17:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree I would like to know the editorial staff listing for the period to se his exact position--if he is one of, say, 50 assistant editors, I would change my !vote. If he was the only one, I think 2nd in command at the most notable magazines is notable. Sort of like VP of Apple. any information? DGG (talk) 00:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

per the above this may help (though I'm not sure about official it does list alot of "assistant editors". G and GNews (all dates) don't turn up (although something called AZcentral.com constitutes all 53 GNews hits - it looks like a column of somesort that the guy himself writes). Neutral as I don't really want to cloud the issue but, thought I'd provide what I could find. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't seem like there's a clear consensus on this. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree with DGG that if he had been the editor, or editor in chief, or something like that he would probably be notable, but the lack of sources (I got a 404 error from Jaynnash2's link by the way) would seem to indicate he was one of many, and did nothing that was noted in the press. Beeblbrox (talk) 00:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As Beeblbrox notes, he appears to have merely been a staff editor, which is not by itself a position that lends notability. --Dhartung | Talk 05:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/merge The article appears to have a source now. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the sole source to which User:Colonel Warden refers says the man's body was used on a Mad magazine cover. This is not a notable thing for a person to do. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 17:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Simply being an editor of a notable magazine does not make one notable, in my opinion. If you go to work everyday, do your job quietly, you can do amazing, notable things, but remain non-notable yourself. Given the lack of verifiable sources, that seems to be what this person did. Unless and until there are reliable and verifiable sources to create a biography of this person, and unless and until his notability is proven beyond the assertion that his occupation may be notable, then delete... user:j (aka justen) 15:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Mad Magazine, or Delete, that also works. J's reasoning is correct, just above. Also, this page, presumably written by him, says he was "an assistant editor", not "the editor". --GRuban (talk) 17:40, 6 August 2008 (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.