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 per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) UpTheOctave! • 8^va? 18:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Klein (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

On behalf of the article subject, per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE, please delete this article as its subject believes himself to be a private, non-notable person who does not meet WP:GNG, WP:BIO and that he is not a notable musician per WP:NMG. See VRT ticket 2025032810007522. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 21:19, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 21:25, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – Per pt.wiki article. There is WP:SIGCOV [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. This is in Brazilian sources, and from what I've seen it is also relevant in Italy and the United States. Svartner (talk) 01:09, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Canada and Illinois. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:39, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: While I'm sympathetic to the subject's request, in addition to the above, the Grammy award in his own name *does* mean that the subject meets point 8 of the criteria for notability of musicians and ensembles. In general we're not so keen on including discographies for classical artists on Wikipedia, but Allmusic shows quite a few albums from major record labels, some of which have been reviewed there, thus meeting criterion 5. Re criterion 6: his (albeit brief) role in the Soni Ventorum Wind Quintet and former position as principal oboist of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, a major orchestra, certainly meet the mark here. Furthermore, the references already listed in the article from The Globe and Mail, Chicago Tribune, and The New York Times demonstrate significant coverage (incidentally the latter article led me to fix hundreds of such links in March/April2008; see the entry in my personal Wikipedia timeline). I'll notify Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music about this nomination. Graham87 (talk) 07:31, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: his wife also tried to edit the article as GuevaraViquez1979 (talk · contribs). Perhaps not my best moment as an admin (see the talk page), but I'll notify her of this nomination. Graham87 (talk) 07:56, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – In addition to his notable musical career, he had coverage not only in Brazilian sources, but also in US newspapers like The New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and magazines The Gramophone, The Double Reed, as well as books, and of course at Slipped Disc. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 10:27, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Subject more than meets the threshold of WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. I do, however, sympathize to an extent with the concerns that GuevaraViquez1979 (talk · contribs) brought up, but that is not the topic of this discussion. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 16:59, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – Notability does not disappear because of a controversy. The subject's termination in May 2024, while significant, does not negate a career with substantial international coverage and recognition. Deletion for this reason sets a problematic precedent and risks violating WP:BLPCRIME and WP:NOTCENSORED. If reliable, independent sources exist both before and after the event, the article meets WP:GNG and should be improved, not removed. Bhw664488 (talk) 09:37, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per Bhw664488. We have seen this before. The only exceptions to this rule are (1) child actors, and (2) when the subject of an article directly contacted the founder of this website and begged him to delete the article from here, because he was applying for another job. So it was deleted, but the subject made the same misreads again, not having had any consequences, at the very next job! Arguably, that case (2) was of a barely public figure; this is of a Grammy Award winning performer. We are an encyclopedia, not a reputation management agency, nor a marriage counseling agency. If you press too hard, then you risk repeating the Streisand effect. As I've noted in several other AfDs lately, the richest man in the world has minions who are looking for every single instance of favoritism, to make editing Wikipedia a crime, so this request could not have come at the worst possible time. My advice is once more to look for the leopard eating one's own face. Bearian (talk) 17:45, 5 April 2025 (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.