David Carnivale: The article is a weird puff piece, likely by a COI editor, and is really just promotional.  I find nothing on the internet that suggests this person is notable.  Drmies ( talk ) 01:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .   I believe Drmies nailed it as "weird puff piece".  Well ... it's different, but neither notable nor adequately sourced.  There are only three inline sources for this individual, but you can't open the sources to verify what they are.  Under "References", the majority of the Staten Island Advance listings are ... well ... not really sources.   There's an online site for Statin Island, but not a news source, as much as it is select dates from about 30 years of the site.  None of which seems to be relevant to this article.  — Maile ( talk ) 03:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists , Authors , Architecture ,  and New York .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This is Architect Dave Carnivale wishing to comment on my page (which I've been proud to have for 15 years) having been nominated for possible deletion.Listing why I should remain sounds immodest and it is awkward, but there are several reasons.  Having been the first architect in the world to have a website (affordablehouse.com) which made its debut March 15, 1996 - the world's first architectural website it should be noted - featuring what at the time was the second book to be printed cover-to-cover on the internet (the site was simplified and revised around 2022 after having been "on the air" so-to-speak for a quarter century - so it is no longer quite "cover-to-cover") is alone enough to warrant my page.  Remember, in 1996 only 25k-30k websites were functioning at all; another 75k simply said "Under Construction."  Secondly, another item is that, acting pro se I fought N.Y.S. all the way to the Supreme Court against special interest legislation affecting N.Y.S. architects and for the most part I succeeded.  Third, in an 8 year federal case, acting pro se, which went twice to the Delaware District Court ('Carnivale v. Staub' Civ.No.08-764-SLR), the U.S. Federal Circuit (Appeal from the U.S.Patent and Trademark Office,Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, in No. 92047553 'Staub v. Carnivale) and twice to the Third Circuit (Civil Action 1:08-cv-00764-SLR) - all of which I won - I brought trademark law, specifically the 1946 Lanham Act regarding trademark protections, into the computer age. The case is now cited throughout the country and established that tiny alterations in domain names are insufficient to protect against claims of trademark infringement.  The Delaware District Court accepted evidence as having proven that, via my website, as of the 2007 date of the trial, 2,301,503 people had read all or part of my book (and it must be noted that the "unique viewers" the webhost reported counted everyone using a particular browser, such as Google or Yahoo etc., on any given day as being one "unique viewer" - meaning that 2.3 million figure was many times that in terms of individual people). That Delaware District case "Carnivale v. Staub Design, LLC, No. CIV. 08-cv-764-SLR" had its judgement entered 1/8/13; it was affirmed along with the statistical evidence mentioned, by the U.S.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit [no. 13-1354 decided 12/3/13] and was again affirmed, including the statistical evidence, by the  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in its decision [Staub Design LLC. v. Carnivale, Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit 2015, No. 2015-1306 decided August 6, 2015]. This shows three federal courts have considered it proven that millions had read all or part of my book as of 2007; undoubtedly millions more have done so in the subsequent years. Though I am not a "famous" architect, I suggest that few architects have had their writings read by, and drawings seen by, millions of people and suggest that alone is worth a Wikipedia entry. In turning to my page I see a few inaccuracies which have crept in over the years; my projects now number more than 700 across the U.S. (not 500) and my book is now self published rather than published by BookSurge. Having practiced for nearly a half century (not quite but getting close) and having won nearly every preservation award there is in N.Y.C. (I am a very traditional architect with a strong interest in preserving historic architecture) I am not unknown and am as much an architect as any of those listed under 'American Architects' - and on Staten Island, a place of 500,000 people, I can say that I am fairly well known.  I do not know why I was moved from "People from Staten Island" to "Artists from Staten Island"- that is inaccurate in that I am an architect, a retired college professor, a preservationist and an author and have, pro se, changed trademark law with respect to the internet - and as you likely know, architects, while they should be artistic in nature, are part historians, part engineers, part mathematicians, part psychologists, part diplomats, part lawyers and part businessmen too - putting me in the severely limited 'artists' category is simply inaccurate.  I see that has been since been corrected, for which I am grateful.  I saw my page called a "Puff Piece" which does not reflect that I was the first pioneer of a major profession on the internet, and, acting pro se for 8 years in federal court, I altered trademark law regarding the internet.  For these reasons, I ask that you might be kind enough to enter my comments into the discussion for me, since I haven't been able to figure out how to do that.  I thank you in advance, Sincerely yours, David Carnivale 2603:7000:6E3B:C199:E8BA:D11:E26:2FB8 ( talk ) 03:58, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This is Architect Dave Carnivale; someone notified me that my Wikipedia page (which I've been proud to have for many years) has been suggested by someone to be deleted.  I write to you because I've tried but cannot find out how to "join the discussion" and hope you will be kind enough to add my comments for me.Sounding immodest cannot be helped in listing why I should remain, forgive me.  First, being the first architect in the world to have a website (affordablehouse.com) which made its debut March 15, 1996, and that at the time having been the second book anywhere on Earth printed cover-to-cover on the internet (the site was simplified and revised around 2022 after having been "on the air" so-to-speak for a quarter century is enough to warrant my page.  Remember, in 1996 only 25k-30k websites were functioning at all; another 75k simply said "Under Construction."Secondly, in an 8 year federal case, pro se, which went to the del.  District Court ('Carnivale v. Staub' Civ.No.08-764-SLR), the Federal Circuit (Appeal from the U.S.Patent and Trademark Office,Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, in No. 92047553 'Staub v. Carnivale) and the Third Circuit (Civil Action 1:08-cv-00764-SLR) I brought trademark law, specifically the 1948 Lanham Act regarding trademark protections into the computer age. The case is now cited throughout the country and established that tiny alterations in domain names is insufficient to protect against claims of trademark infringement. In turning to my page I see a few inaccuracies which have crept in over the years; my projects now number more than 700 across the U.S. (not 500) and my book is now self published rather than published by BookSurge. Having practiced for neary a half century (not quite but getting close) and having won nearly every preservation award there is in N.Y.C. (I am a very traditional architect with a strong interest in preserving historic architecture) I am not unknown and am, as much an architect as those listed under 'American Architects' - and on Staten Island, a place of 500,000 people, I can say that I am fairly well known.I do not know why someone moved me from "People from Staten Island" to "Artists from Staten Island"- that is inaccurate in that I am an architect, a retired college professor, a preservationist and an author - and architects, while they should be artistic, are part historians, part engineers, part mathematicians and part businessmen too- putting me in the 'artists' category is simply less accurate, if not inaccurate.  I see someone called my page a "Puff Piece" which does not reflect I was the first pioneer of a major profession on the internet, and, acting pro se for 8 years in federal court, I altered trademark law regarding the internet.  For these reasons, I ask that you might ne kind enough to enter my comments into the discussion for me, since I haven't been able to figure out how to do that.   I may send this same message to another editor or two, but you are the first I've contacted.... I thank you in advance, Sincerely yours, David Carnivale 2603:7000:6E3B:C199:B1A5:F394:7F02:6A17 ( talk ) (transferred from User talk:Jevansen ) Delete .  Weird puff piece indeed...  First architect to have a website, second book on the Internet...  Sjeez.  -- Randykitty ( talk ) 17:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per nom.  '''[[ User:CanonNi ]]''' ( talk | contribs ) 03:54, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This is David Carnivale.  In 1992 I read in 'The New York Times' that "someday people would have computers in their homes."  Random House publishers did not like the book I wrote "The Affordable House" and I didn't intend to spend years going from publisher to publisher the way authors often do.  I never intended to profit from the book; I wanted to sell the stock plans to homes featured in the book, so I resolved to find out how to get it on the "World Wide Web"(internet was not yet a commonly used term) and then wait until people got computers.  I found one of the first webhosts Bway.net and on March 15, 1996 my website made its debut.  There were about 100,000 websites more or less back then, and three quarters of them said "Under Construction."  In 1996 only the Bible had been posted in its entirety; in 1996 I posted my entire book cover-to-cover and it remained that way without changes until it was simplified and revised in 2022.  You may see The Affordable House on the Wayback Machine from nearly its first days, and the Domain name has been registered with Network Solutions since 1998.  The first two years, at the dawn of the internet, few - including me - even knew domain names could be 'registered' which is why the domain name was unprotected during the first two years (1996-98).  So I disagree with your calling my page a "weird puff piece."  I have been fortunate enough to have been a small part of the Internet's early history, and it is documented and provable.  2603:7000:6E3B:C199:E8BA:D11:E26:2FB8 ( talk ) 04:13, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Above: "In 1996 only the Bible had been posted in its entirety": if this is a claim that the Bible was at the time the only book to have been published on the web in its entirety, it's a surprising one.  Project Gutenberg claims that A Christmas Carol , for example, was "released" in 1992.  The release may have been via FTP , but Hart's file header (with idiosyncratic monospaced justification ) encouraged people to distribute PG's files and it's hard to imagine that nobody was doing this on the WWW.  If A Christmas Carol can be dismissed as slight, there's also what PG termed the complete works of William Shakespeare, which PG claims it first released on 1 January '94. (Of course, PG isn't a disinterested source for information about PG ... and so forth.) -- Hoary ( talk ) 22:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Found nothing obviously helpful at archive.org or ProQuest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 08:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hello; David Carnivale here. If your note means you were unable to locate "The Affordable House" from its early days on the Wayback Machine, here is the address for an archived page dated November 11, 1998 (about two years after the book appeared on the internet): http://web.archive.org/web/19981111185045/http://affordablehouse.com/ 2603:7000:6E3B:C199:89D7:3BB:FF22:368F ( talk ) 15:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] No, I meant I was unable to find any WP:N -relevant sources about David Carnivale. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 16:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails both WP:GNG and also WP:NAUTHOR . Best, GPL93 ( talk ) 12:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Here is something [1] ( Staten Island Advance ), there may be more at [2] . It's local, but local is not nothing. Quote "The author of the "The Affordable House" has completed about 510 buildings, including houses in various traditional styles, bars and clubs - a specialty - and recently, a small airport in Tennessee."  Also this [3] from Historic Districts Council . Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 16:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Drmies This [4] is not the kind of source I'd usually use for a BLP, but it should have some WP:N value, right? Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 17:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] User:Gråbergs Gråa Sång , if you don't mind my getting philosophical--it's the kind of thing that suggests there might be notability, and that there ought to be sources proving it, yes. Thanks, Drmies ( talk ) 19:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per sources linked in previous comment. Some in-article ref-titles hints there may be more, like "Preservation crusader to be honored citywide" Article needs to be re-written though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 17:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - First, I would thank Mr Carnivale for his contributions here. While it may be determined that he doesn’t now meet our Notability criteria, he has had an article here for 15 years and his input on why he believes it should be retained is of value. Second, I’m not competent to judge the notability issue myself but, noting his work on historic structures, I’d be interested in User:Epicgenius ’s view. Nobody has written more on NYC’s historic buildings, and I think he’d offer a valuable perspective. KJP1 ( talk ) 23:10, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks for the ping. I am not going to !vote here myself, but for what it's worth, the coverage of Mr. Carnivale on silive.com seems to mostly be letters/comments written by him, or projects that he worked on, rather than coverage about the man himself. I did find this interview and, to a lesser extent, this human-interest piece about how he creates blueprints. When I searched for his name on Google, I saw directory listings, results about other people, a self-published book, and documents relating to a lawsuit from 2006, but sadly not much else. – Epicgenius ( talk ) 00:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Dear KJPI, Thank you. David Carnivale 2603:7000:6E3B:C199:C5C3:31F6:21E4:FE1A ( talk ) 05:21, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Though no mention has ever been made on my Wikipedia entry, and because I've never known anyone who was able to add it, there may be a lack of recognition just how much my 8.5 year federal case changed internet and trademark law. Below, you'll see I've located a few citations about it; the result was a change in how domain names are treated by federal courts and although not 'Precedential' it has been cited in federal cases in other Circuit Courts.  Even the domain of Wikipedia itself now is now affected by the outcome of this case.  Regarding the Federal Circuit, I found this : https://casetext.com › case › staub-design-llc-v-carnivale https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi? article=2642&context=thirdcircuit_2012 (2012 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit) From the legal website law.justia is this link: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca3/11-1124/11-1124-2012-01-04.html and also: https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca3/11-1124 From leagle.com is this link: https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20120104129 From anylaw.com is this link: https://www.anylaw.com/case/david-john-carnivale-v-staub-design-llc/third-circuit/01-04-2012/AoENPmYBTlTomsSBBMcm .  So, while the design of 700 projects, a small airport and a small town over the course of a long career may mean an architect has left a mark on things but not have given rise to many citations on the internet, the  legal case certainly did, it affects everyone with a domain name, and is alone worth the continuation of my 15 or 16 year old page, (as is the fact, accepted as proven by three federal courts from evidence they examined, that millions had read all or part of my book) thank you, sincerely yours, David Carnivale 2603:7000:6E3B:C199:C5C3:31F6:21E4:FE1A ( talk ) 05:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:OFFLINE sources can be used, but the people you encounter here are very likely to rely on the internet, since trying to access physical newspaper collections etc is harder.  If it helps, what we are looking for, for the purpose of this discussion, are sources that are at the same time reliably published ( WP:RS ), independent of you and about you in some detail.  Add to this "rules" like WP:BLPPRIMARY .  The court case(s) in itself doesn't matter here, but an article about it/you in The New Yorker probably would.  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 07:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Btw, if you're interested in editing WP on topics that interest you (apart from you), consider WP:REGISTER .  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 07:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I see Gråbergs Gråa Sång helped explain a few details to me (thank you) but the heading said "offline" so I am replying here in hopes that it may add to the general discussion (I'm unsure if "offline" remarks can be seen by everyone discussing things here): I wonder if fame and 'notability' are being confused.  Asked to name an architect, Europeans could likely name a dozen or two; ask an American and all they could name is Frank Lloyd Wright (perhaps a handful could name a second architect) - does that mean no American architect is notable or has ever done a notable thing?  Except for Jonas Salk, no one who has ever developed life-saving drugs is famous, yet each is notable.  In architecture there are no "Academy Awards" like Hollywood; we have a "Pritzker Prize" limited almost entirely to architects who design in the Bauhaus or International Style and there are preservation awards like the ones I received for architects with an interest in history, and the AIA gives out awards mainly to its members (and again that is limited almost exclusively to architects designing in just the International Style) but aside from a one-day mention in some press, these are soon remembered mainly by the recipients.  The court cases matter in a way more visible; one relieved 15,000 New York State architects from a special-interest piece of legislation essentially forcing them to either join the private organization who wrote the bill, or suffer the consequence of having to obtain 36 college credits every 36 months for the rest of their lives to keep their license.  It took me six years in court before, finally, both houses of the N.Y.S. legislature and the then-governor (Pataki) were forced to amend the law (over their previous vehement refusals to do so) thus relieving architects of that terrible choice.  As for the other (Trademark) matter, it seems beyond question that protecting everyone's domain name against interlopers and bringing the 1946 trademark law into this century is notable.   Wikipedia - as an encyclopedia - is more than just a 'top ten list' of what's been mentioned most often on Youtube or Salon or other popular websites - it is, I think, meant to be a compilation of knowledge and a resource for discovering things and uncovering facts not all of which have made the "Times;" I believe my being the first in the world in a major profession to be on the internet alone is enough to qualify, and that my website was the second book printed cover-to-cover on the web is more than notable enough to have my page continued.  I would appreciate, since I do not know anyone who is able to do it, if one of those who've been participating in this discussion,would update my page; much has happened in the 15 or 16 years since the page was added.  Thank you, David Carnivale 2603:7000:6E3B:C199:810:2117:14D7:6EDA ( talk ) 10:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:OFFLINE wasn't a heading, it was a hyperlink to the explanatory essay Wikipedia:Offline sources .  My point was that "not have given rise to many citations on the internet" isn't necessarily the end of it.  "Staten Island Advance. Thursday, April 16, 2009. Volume 124 Number 30,019 Page E6 "Preservation crusader to be honored citywide" by Tevah Platt." may be the kind of source we are looking for, but I can't read it, so I have no idea.  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 11:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Gråbergs Gråa Sång , for the "Preservation crusader to be honored citywide" story, does this link work for you?  Epicgenius ( talk ) 13:16, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yup, I missed it before.  IMO, that counts.  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 13:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Btw, David Carnivale, if this article is kept, you might want to consider providing an image for it.  WP:A picture of you has guidance on that.  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 13:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Dear  Gråbergs Gråa Sång, This is David Carnivale.  Thank you but while I'm not computer illiterate, Wikipedia seems to be a universe all of its own - it took me a few days of flailing around before I discovered how to enter this discussion!  My photograph (which, being very privacy conscious, I tried to keep off the internet but it was taken from the "About the Author" section of my book) is now all over the place (along with images labeled as me but that aren't me that Google searches turns up sometimes).  I would have no clue as to how to add my picture here, and it would be inappropriate for me to try to alter my own page, no?  Anyway, this has all been very exhausting and I've found and located all the source material I could, listed it here, listed the updated and consequential (trademark case) information that I think should be added to the page by someone authorized to do so and which, so far, no one has.  I'm frankly surprised by the reliance of second and third hand materials such as web links and magazine articles by an encyclopedia and reluctance of editors debating a deletion to examine first hand sources of material establishing documentation of what is on the page or what I've added to the existing material through statements I've made here - sources such as websites operated by law schools and legal organizations summarizing the import of cases, official court websites etc. making available the various federal court opinions in their entirety, examining the Wayback Machine for evidence of the website's existence from the dawn of the internet, et cetera.  I'm sure it is even possible to check with NetworkSolutions to see they've been registering my domain name since 1998.  I know little of the ways of Wikipedia, but, with respect, it seems to me when someone says "Let's delete this" they ought to closely examine the source material at its original location - otherwise deletions are more arbitrary than academic.  I hope people here decide to leave well enough alone.  As far as my picture goes, since my image is all over the web anyway, any editor here has my okay to add it to the page - I cannot.  To ensure it is me and not a mislabeled picture that is occasionally found on the internet, the true image shows me in front of a reddish orange ancient building in a small Trastevere piazza in Rome and I'm wearing a white shirt with vertical blue stripes.The picture can also be found in the "About the author" section of my website "www.affordablehouse.com" (and no, I'm not plugging the website; don't misunderstand please - I'm nearing the end of a long career and keep the website more-or-less as a "calling card" and something that viewers might learn from or get inspired by in forming their own thoughts and opinions; at this stage of life the last thing I want are more clients...These days I just want to sit back and relax).  But that is where you'll find the photograph.  2603:7000:6E3B:C199:EDE3:A409:B15B:7DA6 ( talk ) 19:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting this discussion.  For the IP editors identifying themselves as "David Carnivale", if you wish to continue to participate in this discussion, please keep comments concise and related to sources and Wikipedia policies, subjects that can impact whether or not this article subject (you) is considered notable by Wikipedia standards.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Dear Liz, This is David Carnivale.  I realize my text was long but it was necessary to list as many citations as possible, and to illustrate the reasons the article should be kept.I expected this to end after seven days, which I read somewhere was the usual rule.  2603:7000:6E3B:C199:EDE3:A409:B15B:7DA6 ( talk ) 04:24, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No coverage of this person that I can find, no book reviews either.  The wall of text above being set aside, this is from the wild west days of Wikipedia, when anyone could create an article and it was pretty much let loose on the world.  We have much more stringent standards now, and this just doesn't stand up.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Dear Oaktree, This is David Carnivale.  I'm sorry that is your impression, but it may have been more helpful had you addressed my being the first pioneer on the internet from a of a major profession, or had brought U.S. trademark law into the internet age, or had made the lives of 15,000 N.Y.S. architects easier, or that the book was read by millions etc.  Editorial decisions should be made after research, not - pardon me for saying so - from people simply stating impressions.  72.227.222.26 ( talk ) 04:40, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi David.  Please take a look at this AfD's talk page; I've posted a few suggestions there that you might find helpful.  -- Marchjuly ( talk ) 05:36, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Link: Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/David Carnivale .  Yes, we have pages for discussion about pages where we discuss things.  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 05:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you, I will.  Dave Carnivale 72.227.222.26 ( talk ) 06:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi David, none of the things you mention are relevant to whether there should be a Wikipedia article.  Your accomplishments are certainly laudable and interesting, but are irrelevant to the question of the existence of an article.  The purpose of Wikipedia is to summarize what reliable sources have previously published .  If there are no reliable sources covering a subject, there can be no Wikipedia article, regardless of how important or significant the subject is.  Please read WP:N for our policy.  Also note that, perhaps counterintuitively, Wikipedia relies mostly on secondary sources, not primary ones, because interpretation of primary sources can be difficult and contentious.  See WP:PRIMARY and WP:SECONDARY for more about this.  A newspaper or magazine article about you (that does not rely on your own statements) would be an excellent source helping to demonstrate notability.  A court website publishing a decision in a legal case would be a primary source and therefore be a weak indication of notability.  CodeTalker ( talk ) 18:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ CodeTalker , in case you didn't see it, sources that have been mentioned in this afd are [5] [6] [7] [8] .  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 20:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks @ Gråbergs Gråa Sång , I did see the sources although I was responding specifically to David's last post which doesn't mention sources, but seems to be arguing for notability based on his works.  Regarding the sources, the first seems to be a typo(?) because it's just a link to this AFD discussion.  The second is a reasonably good source, being about the subject, although it has a lot of quotes from the subject himself so its independence is questionable.  The third is a four-sentence blurb and doesn't meet the "in-depth" criterion IMO.  The fourth seems to be a discussion of a legal case in which David was involved and doesn't discuss the subject himself in any detail.  So of the three, I'd say only the second contributes to notability.  CodeTalker ( talk ) 20:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ CodeTalker Thanks and corrected.  My view: 2 is a bit of a mix, but has enough not-interview to be valid.  3 is somewhere above passing mention, partial GNG-point.  4 is a strange source, but does include some info on Carnivale/plaintiff and his doings, as well as the court cases he was involved in.  I say it also adds to the case for GNG, but hard to say how much.  Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk ) 20:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete While there appears to be information about projects this person has been involved in to be found in the Staten Island Advance, there as yet to be anything beyond that source that is significantly about him.  We generally consider multiple articles in a single source to be considered one notability source.  I checked in the NY Times (and Staten Island news of import should be covered there) and found nothing.  His book is self-published, so that does not support notability.  Being party to a lawsuit itself does not support notability, only if the lawsuit gets significant press that talks about the person.  Also, it looks like the Court decided [9] not to take up the case.  Anyone can file, but it only matters if the court takes the case.  Awards can count toward notability but local awards that get no notice outside of that jurisdiction do not themselves confer GNG.  I must say that the claim that his book is "the second book to appear cover-to-cover on the internet" is simply wrong.  I have a Project Gutenberg CD from that time with 10,000 books.  Lamona ( talk ) 18:02, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above, especially the cogent reasoning by Lamona , and that it's difficult to verify much of the information .  If we cut out everything that we can't verify, what is left is a BLP violation .  There are literally tens of thousands of writs of certiorari filed annually.  The petitioner is not automatically notable , but the case he filed might be, so I would not oppose a move or redirect to the case name.  Bearian ( talk ) 17:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] David Carnivale, clearing up possible misconceptions: Host Colin Jost at the White House correspondents dinner a few nights ago spoke of the large circulation of the Staten Island Advance (the flagship publication of the entire Newhouse newspaper chain); it is the newspaper of record for Staten Island, whose 500,000 population makes it larger than Atlanta, Miami, Pittsburgh, Cleveland and Minneapolis.  Some comments have made it sound like a minor supermarket circular.  As far as the many articles in law journals about the change I brought about to federal trademark law and N.Y.S. law, I've discovered that after 15 years, internet articles tend to disappear.  An encyclopedia conflating 'notoriety' and 'notability' and limiting inclusions to temporary, passing, gossamer mentions on the web is built on a shaky foundation, since such mentions or 'likes' or press notices all tend to disappear over time.  Doctors and lawyers, engineers and the other professions do not have any way to discover who among them was first on the internet or what was the first website in their profession to appear; my page allows architects to discover just that.  To make Wikipedia less complete, less a repository of knowledge and less able to disseminate knowledge by erasing that bit of early internet history is of no benefit.  After all, they call it the "Groves of Academe," not the "plains."  I hope everyone will see the page is better left as is, and I hope someone who is able to will update it- 15 years is a long time.  2603:7000:6E3B:C199:D070:D841:D5BA:186E ( talk ) 06:15, 1 May 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete