Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noel N. Ashman

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. What a mess. There may well be a notable article here but the potential for it to be a BLP nightmare appears immense. What is clear is that we can’t have edit warring over BLP type material and neither can we have a self-serving COI based article. Giving spas with no policy basis very littke weight, I’m going to delete this with the suggestion that someone ininvolved writes a draft using available sources to see if a BLP compliant article is possible. If so, bring the draft to DRV for review. 06:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC) Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Noel N. Ashman

Noel N. Ashman (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)

Under the title Noel Ashman, this was deleted three times and salted back in 2012. This new article is not identical to the deleted versions, because it does address doings that took place after 2012. But those doings amount to little more than being a co-owner of a club and an executive producer for films, neither of which create any notability for the subject.

There has been some edit-warring over whether it should contain sourced information about legal problems faced by the subject and his club. See this prior version for the "full" article. NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

The prior deletion discussions were at WP:Articles for deletion/Noel Ashman, WP:Articles for deletion/Noel Ashman (2nd nomination), and WP:Articles for deletion/Noel Ashman (3rd nomination). NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 12:43, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 12:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

• A user with a clear agenda has been targeting this page. The Biography of Living Person guidelines state, "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives".

Per those guidelines, language such as "Ashman’s latest club was fraught with difficulties from its very beginnings." or "“They owe everybody money and the neighbors and the police are tired of them,” claimed a nightlife insider." have no place in a Wiki article.

It is clear that the user, who has added such content multiple times, shows a one-sided negative bias. -- Co44ee (talk) 03:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Just as Kevin Spacey's page makes reference to allegations against the artist, referenced facts regarding Mr. Ashman have been RE included on this page. There is no "tabloid" angle here, only referenced quotes from reliable publications, which have written about Mr. Ashman for decades. Ghostofchristmaspast (talk) 04:12, 24 January 2018 (UTC)ghostofchristmaspast

• I agree with the user co44ee Clearly the user ghostsofchristmaspast has a personal vendetta about this subject(as the user name would suggest) wikipedia is not a place for personal issues. As far as notability the subject is the producer of two big films clinton road with ice t and wasted talent with many stars & is executive producer on the bruce willis movie reprisal & the gotti movie starring john travollta which has been getting extreme amounts of media attention. He also has owned some very high profile nightclubs studio 54, veruka, plumm and the leonora. All these clubs have gotten huge media attention and been hangouts for a-list celebrities so it seems very clear by any standard his notability is clearly worthy of this article as well as interesting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cutienumber5 (talk • contribs) 08:57, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

AGAIN: Just as Kevin Spacey's Wikipedia page makes reference to allegations against the artist (these in addition to Mr. Spacey's gifts and notable achievements), referenced facts regarding Mr. Ashman have been RE included on this page. There is no "tabloid" angle here, only referenced quotes from reliable publications, which have written about Mr. Ashman for decades. These same publications have also been cited in numerous other Wikipedia articles. Furthermore, the above user’s objections are not to “allegations”, as in the case of someone such as Kevin Spacey, but rather to referenced facts and court documents concerning Mr. Ashman. Ghostofchristmaspast (talk) 04:12, 24 January 2018 (UTC)ghostofchristmaspast — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghostofchristmaspast (talk • contribs) 20:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

To compare your bias edit to that of kevin spacey in beyond ridiculous. Mr spacey was accused of horrible deeds and actual crimes, by many notable high profile people and reported on in many mainstream media outlets, these allegations were deemed so credible that they caused his removal from a top tv show(house of cards) as well as many high profile films. In the case of mr ashman none of the high profile media outlets that have constantly covered him over the last 25 years, and are referenced on this page(the ny times, people magazine, variety etc) have covered these silly allegations. My read of your 'sources' which are mostly very obscure websites that are no longer even in existence, show common partner disagreements that happen all the time in business. It is also notable that after these allegation mr ashman remained owner of the business in question(plumm) for three more years clearly showing the validity of his accusers arguments. By your logic we should waste time on wikipedia discussing josh hartnett's traffic tickets or tracy morgans disagreements with his high school friends. You need to refer to wikipedia guidelines. Wikipedia is not a place for airing out old grudges, if you are indeed an old associate of mr ashman's(which it is clear that you are) that holds a grudge you should seek relief in court or with your psychologist. user: Cutienumber5 (talk) 2:37, 25 january 2018(utc)

The referenced sources the above user refers to and appears dissatisfied with and considers "very obscure" or "no longer in existence" are as follows: The Daily News, The New York Post, The Village Voice and The New York Observer, which, in 2016 became Observer.com.Ghostofchristmaspast (talk) 07:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

• Comment from nominator. @Co44ee, Ghostofchristmaspast, and Cutienumber5: I've moved your lengthy discussion to the article's Talk page (Talk:Noel N. Ashman), which is where it should have been from the start. This Articles for Deletion page is for discussing the merits of either keeping or deleting the article in its entirety. If this is your first "AfD discussion", you might want to take a look at WP:Articles for deletion#Contributing to AfD discussions. If any of you objects to my moving the discussion, feel free to restore it. Thank you for your cooperation. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

• Kill it. It's a vanity page. And if you google around on this guy, Ashman, you find some pretty unflattering stuff out there -- perhaps some user or editor with more free time than I should enter some of those unseemly details and their sources to create a more comprehensive profile of this individual. Wikipedia is for looking up figures such as Churchill, Jeanne d'Arc and my bandmates :) -- not selling tickets to something! EdZeppelin (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Comment – The subject appears to be notable (notorious?), but the article seems to attract a vicious edit war about Ashman's legal problems. I have no idea how that can be prevented. A permanent page protection is not normally applied. Maybe the two editors involved could be issued with a topic ban? If that isn't feasible either, deleting and salting the article might be the only option. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:57, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

• Obvious keep. I agree with user Michael Bednarek the subject is clearly notable by any standard. I actually live in chicago and do not spend much time in new york, but even i am familiar with him and many of his clubs veruka studio 54 and plum. I am also a big fan of his girlfriend paula devicq from her days on the tv shows party of five and rescue me. I did not even know he produced movies but i did see one of them "mind the gap" and it was excellent. I see on the page he also is a producer & writer of documentaries and even the new gotti film with john travolta which i am dying to see. timesup1000 talk 9:05, 26 January 2018 (utc)

• Definite keep. I agree Michael Bednarek and timesup. Although I am little old for the nightclub scene I am young enough to read the papers and I have seen that Ashman has owned several very famous night clubs, chaired some huge charity events including several for the Rainforest Action Network, and produced some fine movies, a few of which I have seen, and some of which I am looking forward to seeing —especially the Gotti film with John Travolta and the Reprisal with Bruce Willis. Also my company did a corporate party at the Plumm which was impressively elegant and I saw some of the normal crowd wander in late in the evening, including Denzel Washington and other familiar faces I probably should have been able to name. I am disturbed to see the vindictiveness of ghostofchristmaspast on Wikipedia.It is unseemly for someone to use Wikipedia to grind an axe from some sort of personal issue with the subject. Is it an unrequited lover? an actor who was rejected for a movie role? someone who couldn’t get into one of his clubs? or are we dealing with some sort of media stalker? I googled Ashman, and he has nearly 300,000 google hits. He has been in People, Variety, NY Times, Us Weekly, Wall Street Journal, Paper, Vogue, Vanity Fair, New York Magazine etc How can one argue he isn’t notable? He has been referred to in these publications as “Club king,” “Ringmaster”, “Mogul,” “One of the five most important people in New York” “Club mogul turned film mogul” what more does it take to be notable? Sorry for the length of this entry, but this got under my skin.-- catsanddrums talk 3:28, 26 January 2018(UTC)

• Noel Ashman warranting a Wikipedia page? There is no God. Every single one of Ashman's places was evicted from its location including the one that stands as his claim to fame: Veruka. I sat court-side for that little fiasco. Whether Ashman has been in business three months, a year or six, the business model remains the same: Don't pay the floor staff and just wait for them to quit and then replace them with others. Every time I read mention of Ashman in the newspaper it is for being evicted yet again and being sued by his investors. The last club he owned got padlocked by the city for operating as an illegal strip club. (That's what places do when they can't pay their water bill) Where are all these details?? Why are they conveniently left out of Ashman's profile? These incidents are all easily searchable and have been covered in depth by the media. I 100% guarantee that Ashman or an associate of his wrote the Wikipedia article on him and that every single one of these supporters is a friend or family member. Regine, Peter Gatien, Steve Rubell, Ian Schrager, Nur Kahn, Amy Sacco, Noah Tepperberg, Jason Strauss and Mark Packer -- these are the past and present players in the New New York City Nightlife scene -- not this self-promoting, broken down valise. Ashman is a total fraud. PS & FYI: those are all straight-to-video or straight-to-YouTube titles in Ashman's Producer roster. Thenightisyoung (talk) 20:06, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

• Mina Mary (talk) 16:00, 28 January 2018 (UTC)* KEEP. I grew up in New York and spent time going to all the clubs of the mid 90's through 2010. I spent many a night surrounded by celebrities, pro-athletes and those like me that were enjoying the scene all over the city. I loved Noel Ashman's clubs and his parties, how could anyone question he was one of the originators and perfectors of the lounge/club experience with Veruka? As reading is a great hobby I was always amazed at the cross-section of people at his clubs, as they had been at Studio 54 in the day. I could not open a publication without mention of Veruka and Noel Ashman's many accomplishments at such a young age. I saw reference to his clubs in Cosmopolitan Magazine, People, The New York Post, The New York Daily News, US Magazine, everything this man did was written about, the people in his clubs were written about, the fact that Veruka was a favorite of the New York Yankees was a known fact. In a city that never sleeps the nightlife and the creators of that nightlife are a substantial part of the city we love and deserve recognition of what they have accomplished, the part they have played and the part they continue to play. Now I read about him creating, producing movies (I do read everything). He seems to be able to create successful entertainment and that is not in doubt. The fact that he has been successful seems to have brought haters. Don't late the haters win. I am honestly shocked and saddened that this is even being discussed.[User: Mina Mary] 9:57 28 January 2018

• Comment from nominator. Hello, folks. I see that, with the exception of User:Michael Bednarek, all of you are new to Wikipedia, with accounts that were all started earlier this month (and, for some of you, your edits here are your only edits to Wikipedia). I welcome all of you to Wikipedia. And if you haven't already done so, I encourage you to read WP:Articles for deletion#Contributing to AfD discussions.

  Although you are free to make any argument (for or against) that you believe will be helpful, there are two areas of discussion that will likely be found significant by the administrator who closes this discussion. These are:

1. This article was "salted" back in 2012, meaning that it should not have been re-created without going through the deletion-review process. The only reason the article was able to be re-created without going through that process was that the name of the article was changed to include the subject's middle initial. Is this enough to justify by-passing the usual system, especially given that the article doesn't use the middle initial and doesn't even tell us what it stands for? Some might find this to be a deceptive practice; others might say that the "ends justify the means" and that the article should be allowed to remain as a fait accompli. Your opinions on this will be helpful to the closing administrator.
2. Has the article demonstrated the existence of significant coverage of the subject by reliable sources? Of the nineteen references in the article, ten are to IMDB -- a site that is not considered reliable by Wikipedia (because it is user-generated) and would need to be removed even if the article is kept. The same concern applies to the whodatedwho.com reference. And having a LinkedIn page contributes nothing to encyclopedic notability. Of the seven other references, I see four that mention the subject only in passing and another (the Daily News) that provides local coverage of a local business dispute. That leaves us with just two references that might be providing significant coverage. But the 1999 article from the Times gives us little more than the subject talking about a professional baseball player. And being friends with a ballplayer isn't what it takes to get a Wikipedia article. That leaves us with the HuffingtonPost piece, which actually does go into the type of detail that one expects to see being used as a reference. But ..., that piece was not written by a member of the HuffPost's journalistic staff. Instead, it appears as a blog contributed by a person who describes herself as a "paranormal intuitive investigator". I don't find this person to be a reliable source, especially considering that her blog would have received little to no editorial oversight from the HuffingtonPost. I also find it of more than passing interest that the blog was updated at about the same time the Wikipedia article was re-created.

Your comments on these observations will be helpful to the closing administrator. NewYorkActuary (talk) added at 18:06, 28 January 2018‎

COMMENT TO NOMINATOR: Lo and behold - a voice of reason amidst all the clatter...Thenightisyoung (talk) 20:06, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Here's some Noel Ashman facts and references worthy of a Wikipedia page:

Court records show the New York City Marshall’s office took possession of The Plumm on April 9, 2009 as a result of $113,727 in unpaid rent. Housing Court records show that even prior to winning an eviction, The Plumm’s landlord had filed suit against the club on six separate occasions. In 2005, when the club was known as NA, investors unsuccessfully attempted to oust Ashman as managing partner for overspending “approximately 163% over the amount budgeted in the business plan,” although the club was operating only three days a week, not seven, as originally planned, according to court papers.

Multiple employees of the Plumm stated that they were bilked by Ashman, whom they claimed, in addition to not paying their hourly wages, stole their tips.

In 2014, Ashman opened The Leonora in the Chelsea section of Manhattan with investors Michael Strahan, Simon Rex, and Damon Dash.

Eviction proceedings began against the Leonora three months after its opening. Not long after, the NYPD raided the Leonora, when they received a tip that it was being operated as an illegal adult cabaret. Multiple summonses were issued, putting the club’s liquor license in jeopardy.

“They owe everybody money and the neighbors and the police are tired of them,” claimed a nightlife insider. As of April 1, 2015 The Leonora had issued nearly 150 unredeemable checks to vendors and employees over a seven-month period. Ashman was soon squaring off with his partners and investors and resorted to installing an alarm system, which prohibited those same investors from entering the club during the daytime, in order to review the club’s financial records. Alleging that $89,000 in cash was unaccounted for, these investors drafted a legal letter to Ashman, demanding that he “produce a complete set of accounting records.”

On November 29, 2015, a stop-work order was served on the Leonora by the Workers Compensation Board, which cited the club with $18,000 in unpaid fines. The New York City Marshall’s office took possession of the Leonora on January 5, 2016.

During the period between Plumm and Leonora, Ashman attempted to operate a club known as The Elsinore. He appeared unable to get along with his partners even before the venue opened for business. The venture was short lived and The Elsinore shuttered prior to its official opening as a result of Ashman being locked out of the premises by his partners and investors, one of who claimed: “Mr. Ashman, outside of self-promoting himself did nothing,”

Ghostofchristmaspast (talk) 20:19, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

References

@Ghostofchristmaspast: When I made my nomination statement, I linked to what I called the "full" article. But when discussing the referencing, I neglected to check for the additional sources that appeared in that version. You have my apologies for the error and my thanks for correcting it.

These additional references all share something in common -- they are all New York papers providing local coverage of a local business dispute. How would you respond to anyone who argued that such local coverage does not demonstrate the notability required for a global encyclopedia? NewYorkActuary (talk) 04:54, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

KEEP. While there is some debate on what belongs on the entry itself, I feel like there are more than enough citations and sources to satisfy the notability requirements. In addition to the stories listed above, the subject has been covered extensively by credible sources. I did some additional digging and found numerous offline articles that mention him including NY TIMES, NY POST PEOPLE, PAPER MAGAZINE, VANITY FAIR, NY MAGAZINE. Those are all prominent national magazines. They can be found here: http://www.noelashman.com/press.html Co44ee (talk) 17:57, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

NY POST
Pay To Play - Inside New York's Most Exclusive Members Clubs https://nypost.com/2006/04/19/pay-to-play-inside-new-yorks-most-exclusive-members-clubs/
Trivial Pursuits: Our Beloved Yankees Have Their Share of Idiosyncracies https://nypost.com/2001/10/27/trivial-pursuits-our-beloved-yankees-have-their-share-of-idiosyncracies/
How Out Players Party
https://nypost.com/1999/10/14/how-out-players-party-or-not-they-are-foes-on-the-field-but-are-they-friends-at-the-bar-read-on/
Promotion Commotion: How to Get Paid to Party with Pals https://nypost.com/2001/11/01/promotion-commotion-how-to-get-paid-to-party-with-pals/

THE NY TIMES
A NIGHT OUT WITH: David Wells and Noel Ashman; Extra Innings Blowout http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/13/style/a-night-out-with-david-wells-and-noel-ashman-extra-innings-blowout.html

NY MAG
Ashman's New Credit
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/1131/
The Toughest Velvet Rope in Town
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/columns/intelligencer/4319/

EATER NY
Noel Ashman Ready For Some More, But Will it Work? https://ny.eater.com/2009/12/11/6750475/noel-ashman-ready-for-some-more-but-will-it-work#comment-514793

GRUB STREET
Noel Ashman to Film Life Story, Open Clubs in NYC and A.C. http://www.grubstreet.com/2008/03/noel_ashman_to_film_life_story.html

NEWSDAY
Down days for NYC nightlife https://www.newsday.com/entertainment/down-days-for-nyc-nightlife-1.877234

• Delete a non-notable businesssman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:23, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete: Recreation of salted title. I have not dealt with recreated articles that were salted but there are issues and questions:

1. How can this article not be in violation of policy? A subversive act, or creation through lack of knowledge, the recreation by adding a middle initial or name is still the same article about the same person.
2. Why is this not a major concern? There is a process to create or recreate a salted article, that is policy. It has been suggested to delete and "salt" but this would actually be "resalt". The salting of a title is case sensitive and changing the title up can essentially game the system. It can be by good-faith mistakes and bad-faith games but is still a means of circumventing the "spirit of community consensus. In my opinion once this has been brought to light it changes the possible outcome.
3. It would not be forum shopping to alert the admin that salted the title. Otr500 (talk) 05:58, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
4. TO OTR500 & THE REST OF YOU: The recreation of the article is, without question, a subversive act. I've been in NY nightlife all of my life. I have worked closely with the subject, Noel Ashman, and known him 25 years. Funny how I never knew he had a middle initial. However, this I do know: Noel Ashman been trying to raise funds and secure a location for a new venue for some time now, but the press coverage on his last three places is so damning and horrendous (see the stuff sourced and referenced above by some other user), that he went and UN-salted his Wikipedia page in order to provide some positive coverage. But I guess that only works if nobody edits the self-serving Wikipedia Page that Mr. Ashman likely whipped up on his own. Thenightisyoung (talk) 06:15, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

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.