Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jared Seide (2nd nomination)

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. Black Kite (talk) 01:03, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jared Seide (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The same issue remains that led to deletion in last year's deletion discussion: lack of notability, i.e., lack of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Cited sources are self-published, interviews, or mentions. I couldn't find requisite coverage for notability in searches. Biogeographist (talk) 15:36, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Biogeographist (talk) 15:36, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Biogeographist (talk) 15:36, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this helpful summation,Biogeographist and for the mentoring. The recent feature on his work in The Sun magazine, coverage on NBC-TV and the award from the American Correctional Association and coverage of his work in prisons seemed to establish considerable significance/notability, but then again that may not be the case. After Heartglow30797 had suggested missing CSD A7 Guidelines, I made an edit to the "Organization" section to state what seemed clear from The Sun profile: "Seide is a leading authority on the practice of Council...," rather than beginning the section with, simply, "Seide directs Center for Council." My intention was to add that language to address CSD A7, but I may have failed to follow proper protocol, as I see that edit was deleted. Perhaps it should have stated that he is "considered an authority on innovative rehabilitative programs in California prisons"? Was unclear if that assertion of significance/noteworthiness did or did not require support from a reliable source/reference. I regret my stumble... and I apologize for the rookie editor error. Trying to parse the distinction between significance and notability. Thanks very much for your patience and help as I learn the ropes! Rosebenny (talk) 19:00, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and salt. Adequate sources not found. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]
• Comment: The piece in The Sun is an interview, considered a non-independent primary source. The other two sources are mentions, not sufficient to establish notability. Notability has a special meaning on Wikipedia and is based on available sources; it doesn't refer to the content of the article. Seide hasn't gained notability since the last deletion discussion a year ago. Biogeographist (talk) 23:32, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a non-notable educator.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:35, 26 May 2020 (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.