Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Baxtrom

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 keep. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Baxtrom (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)

Several issues. The article appears closer to an advertisement than a neutral WP:POV. It focuses more on the restaurant owned by Baxtom than Baxtom himself WP:COATRACK, and it fails to establish Baxtom's notability; as with the article itself, most references either focus on the restaurant itself or only mentioning the restaurant in passing; only one has any reasonable length on Baxtrom, and even there the primary focus of the article is his restaurant. As such, I believe it fails WP:N - it's possible that the restaurant itself is sufficiently notable, but I don't believe merging is the correct solution in this case, given the WP:POV issues found herein. -- NoCOBOL (talk) 14:42, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - agree with nom. Fails POV, GNG, and multiple other criteria. I think it's possibly a COI as well. Skirts89 (talk) 15:56, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:BASIC. Sources are about the subject's restaurant. Restaurant has good coverage, might be good as part of a (yet to be created) section on restaurants in the Farm to table article.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:38, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep based on awards. The chef is arguably the reason why they have the fame they do. Postcard Cathy (talk) 01:19, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Except for one, the awards are all won by the Restaurant, not the Chef. -- NoCOBOL (talk) 05:49, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you are trying to say but I disagree. As the owner, he is responsible to a great extent, for the restaurant’s success. Ok, example. Steven Spielberg’s films were critical and commercial successes. Nominated for numerous awards during his career. But he personally never won an Oscar until much later in his career. But no one argued his role in the success of his films. I am saying the same thing here. He deserves credit for the success of his business. Postcard Cathy (talk) 14:10, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So does someone with a PhD. Unfortunately, their PhD doesn't make them notable, as these awards doesn't make this man. What we need to discuss is whether this man is notable enough to be here, not whether he deserves to be here.-- NoCOBOL (talk) 15:37, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Assertions that article or references cover the restaurant not Greg Baxtrom are unsupported. See [1] and [2] where Baxtrom is mentioned more frequently than Olmsted. The restaurant is not mentioned until the second half of the article. Clearly the reason Baxtrom is notable is because of Olmsted but he is clearly notable and given the awards and coverage, it is not WP:TOOSOON for an article on this subject. As to WP:NPOV, that's a subjective assessment and I don't see a serious issue here. In any case, deletion is not required to fix this. ~Kvng (talk) 16:28, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:54, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:54, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Kvng's sources. There are multiple, reliable, and sufficiently extensive sources which are primarily about the subject. Checks all of the boxes. --Jayron32 13:47, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep - the second source suggested by Kvng is certainly Sig Cov regarding Baxtrom. The former is more marginal, with functionally every paragraph not dedicated to the restaurant at least mixed in with it. That said, I do believe it's a marginal issue, and a reasonable case can be made for retention. Nosebagbear (talk) 23:24, 6 February 2019 (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.