Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ron Schwartz

Add links
Source: 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 keep, with a careful eye toward maintaining neutrality and balance as required by

WP:BLP. Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:53, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Ron Schwartz

Ron Schwartz (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)

Queried speedy delete as "attack page", but the accusation of cheating dates back to 06:02, 2 June 2016, and is the accusation true? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:42, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources only show notability for this event. There are 1000's players on on these bulletins, non of which have wikipedia articles. (Even if we would try to compile and create wikipedia articles on all the palyers, - I have no doubt that they would all be deleted). CaseeArt Talk 16:07, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree. There was a short, two-paragraph introduction (with three sources), a list of accomplishments, and a copy-and-paste of the other article (seven paragraphs with 14 sources). To me, that indicates either an intention to smear the subject or a complete imbalance (most likely both). — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 19:39, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • The article Cheating in bridge which already has this incident, and only includes a tiny minority percentage of all the cheaters, - none of the other people on the "wall of shame" of that article have 4 separate articles. In fact, almost none of them have any separate Wikipedia articles at all about them. CaseeArt Talk 16:29, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • I assume that's precisely because the others are not notable except for their cheating. Ron Schwartz was a world champion and very well known, top-ranking, international player, so he has notability independent of the cheating allegations; in fact it would be more of a smear not to let him have a bio article (which would imply he's just some guy who cheated at bridge). W. P. Uzer (talk) 09:06, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
          • Sources don't support that. Other than this case - he would would be like any other player which is again the BLP1 problem. But in either case this is an attack style page. CaseeArt Talk 20:37, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
            • The article cites sources that support that - this is certainly not a bridge player "like any other", but a very prominent one. And if the article is an "attack-style page" (I'm quite sure that wasn't actually the intention of the editors who created it) then the solution is not to delete it, but to change it to be more balanced, which can easily be done just by removing what I think was a transclusion of part of another article. W. P. Uzer (talk) 08:09, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
              • I created the original page. Ron is an open world champion, a junior world champion, a 2 time winner of the Spingold, he won the Cavendish pairs. All of this is sourced. This is not
                WP:BIO1E.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 17:33, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply
                ]
  • Keep. I support W. P. Uzer's arguments. I see that the article's contents have already been blanked. Shouldn't that have waited for a decision to have been arrived at here, rather than jumping the gun? JH (talk page) 10:11, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to
    Fisher and Schwartz cheating allegation. The person is known only for this alleged scandal so the BIO1E would fit as noted above. Also of note is that "W. P. Uzer" has added the contents of the article to their user page, in a hidden comment; https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:W._P._Uzer&diff=765625016&oldid=564471396 ValarianB (talk) 14:01, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Keep. I am a long time editor/contributor to Contract Bridge biographies. I have created over 150 biographies of players, more than anyone else. Ron Schwartz, and his long time Bridge partner, Lotan Fisher, won an open Bridge world championship in 2011 (151 teams entered). They also won the invitation-only Cavendish Pairs, the largest by far money event in Bridge. Each of those accomplishments by itself makes them notable enough to have a Wikipedia entry IMHO. Having both accomplishments is virtually automatic that they qualify for having a Wikipedia entry. They have also won two top American Contract Bridge League (ACBL) National (NABC) events. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spingold . They won the event in 2014 and 2015. Virtually all first and second place winners of that event since it started (1930) have Wikipedia entries. Ron and Lotan have won it twice, in consecutive years. Based on their Bridge credentials, both Ron and Lotan are fully deserving of Wikipedia entries.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both Ron and Lotan have been accused of cheating. There was a TV show made about the allegation. The Israeli Bridge Federation (IBF) found them guilty. The European Bridge League (EBL) found them guilty. Full disclosure: I was one of the experts called by EBL. The EBL found them guilty of cheating at a tournament in Croatia in 2014 based on video evidence. The American Contract Bridge League (ACBL) also found them guilty of cheating at an ACBL event (the Spingold in 2015), again based on video evidence. The cheating scandal has been covered in many news organizations, including The Daily Telegraph, Vanity Fair, NPR. The cheating scandal by itself is also worthy of a Wikipedia page. To answer an early question on if they are guilty, see http://www.eurobridge.org/Data/Sites/1/media/documents/EBL_FS_Decision.pdf for the EBL ruling. See http://www.acbl.org/recent-disciplinary-decisions/ for the ACBL decision. In the ACBL decision, Ron and Lotan were stripped of their 2014 and 2015 Spingold wins. The Spingold is one of the oldest Bridge trophies. They are the only pair stripped of their titles in 80+ years.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re: Transclusion. At one point there was separate description of the cheating scandal on Ron's page, Lotan's page, as well as two other Contract Bridge related pages. It makes sense for there to be a single page that can be transcluded from other pages (e.g. Ron, Lotan, Cheating in Bridge) page. It does not make sense for the topic to be covered in 3 separate Wiki pages. I've posted my comments in separate line items, because each is a separate topic. To summarize: based on bridge achievements, Ron and Lotan are deserving of their own Wikipedia entries. In both cases, details of the cheating allegations/scandals should be transcluded from a separate page to avoid redundancy. The page on Ron Schwartz should be reinstated. Any similar attempt to remove the page on Lotan Fisher should be referred back to this discussion.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - this is the third request from the same person for speedy deletion In reviewing the history of the Ron Schwartz page, I realized that I actually created it. The original page is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ron_Schwartz&type=revision&diff=720979154&oldid=720977252 this shows his original listing was based on his accomplishments. I have added lots of notable bridge players - I am not likely to remember all I have created. There were two speedy deletion request from the same user on 10 June 2016. Both were denied.Nicolas.hammond (talk) 15:55, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    You can't vote twice. Bolded part of 2nd comment struck. ValarianB (talk) 17:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 02:13, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the meantime, does anyone object if we restore the article as it was, but minus the transclusion of the cheating allegations page? The only reason it was blanked is because someone perceived it as an "attack", and without the transclusion it certainly would not be. (Of course, it would make the above discussion a bit confusing to anyone arriving at this discussion, but we can leave notes explaining what's happened.) W. P. Uzer (talk) 08:41, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Since there are no objections and I can't think why there would be, I'm going to do this. Hopefully this will help concentrate minds in this discussion on the actual issue. Hence please note that the version of the article referred to in this discussion (up to now) is not the current version but the one from before it was blanked (probably this). W. P. Uzer (talk) 11:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we should err on the side of caution to avoid unsupported attacks. Wikipedia is not meant to right great wrongs or to serve as a muck racker.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:53, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't understand what you mean. The "attack" question can be put to rest easily enough by removing the long material about the cheating allegations (which is certainly not "unsupported"). The question to consider is whether, apart from those allegations, this person is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. It seems to me that, given his world champion status etc., he undoubtedly is. The "attack" thing is a red herring that we should no longer be discussing, at least not in the context of whether the article should be deleted. W. P. Uzer (talk) 11:12, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Same argument as before. Ignoring the cheating, Ron Schwartz has won 1 World Open Championship, 1 Youth World Championship, 1 European championship, 1 Cavendish and 2 Spingolds (2014, 2015). Each of those achievements is worthy of a Wikipedia entry. Having all these accomplishments is a no-brainer that he has a Wikipedia entry. As an aside, the "Cheating allegation" needs to be called "Cheating scandal". Schwartz and Fisher had hearings at the ACBL, EBL, and Israeli Bridge Federation. They all found them guilty. Again, I was the original author of the page, I've created 150+ Bridge biographies based on published criteria of what would make a bridge player worthy of a Wiki entry. Ron more than qualifies. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Winning the Spingold and other notable titles is quite an accomplishment in the bridge world, however they were earned. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:15, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There are 4 separate articles about the cheating. This one is an
WP:ATTACK style because it only discusses one issue of the cheating. Also, very few winners have their own articles. CaseeArt Talk 04:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
Very few winners have their own articles? Have you looked at Spingold#Winners? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:00, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The player is Wiki notable on multiple fronts as stated in the foregoing commentaries. The fact he was later found guilty of cheating later does not obviate this. Newwhist (talk) 22:06, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are only about this one incident of cheating.- which creates
WP:BLP1E Problem.CaseeArt Talk 04:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
There are at least 3 documented incidents of cheating at different events. Ron has had more than one suspension from the Israeli Bridge Federation (IBF) because of cheating. See http://main.bridge.co.il/uploads/files/sec/sec-decision-30-en.pdf from IBF regarding prior IBF history including a suspension in 2005 for turning in a wrong score. The EBL and IBF held hearings on cheating in Croatia in 2014. Ron/Lotan were found guilty by EBL and IBF. There is video evidence. ACBL determined Ron/Lotan were cheating in the 2015 Spingold. Also, video evidence. See reference earlier. This is 3 separate cheating instances in 3 separate jurisdictions. All are documented by the appropriate authorities. As a World Champion, Ron is deserving of a Wiki entry. The cheating instances are a correct historical record of this person. Ron/Lotan are famous for Bridge, and infamous for cheating. The IBF announcement about his priors is a recent announcement. Nicolas.hammond (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • For
    WP:BLP1E
    .
  • In either case, this article is
    WP:ATTACK
    and there is no version to restore to.
  • Even according to those who justify the article, why do we need 4 separate duplicate articles about this BLP's cheating. Either articles should be entirely deleted - or at least some of the articles merged. CaseeArt Talk 20:44, 24 February 2017 (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/Ron_Schwartz&oldid=1071206389"