Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Katz (chef): Difference between revisions

Michael Katz (chef) (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)

non-notable, advert, no coverage in reliable sources about Katz. Polygnotus (talk) 16:36, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Israel. Shellwood (talk) 16:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 18:24, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I don’t see any coverage about him, mostly confirmation of where he’s worked. This reads like a resume. The food writer could be notable, but besides columns he’s written, there isn’t much. Oaktree b (talk) 19:47, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Administrator note The article is tagged as potential UPE. I can affirm that it is paid editing, and that the paid editing was declared, but that declaration was lost in a deletion. The paid editor was Anya Rubstein. — asilvering (talk) 19:48, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Asilvering Tag removed. Polygnotus (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: He has received substantial independent coverage in reliable sources. I have added sources that further strengthen this: Makor Rishon profiles his culinary achievements, the Jerusalem Post highlights his founding of the Attilio culinary school, The Israel National News sources detail his international representation, Ynet notes that he taught at the Cordon Bleu in London, and Walla! Food explains his previous role as head chef of Edom (Adom) restaurants in Jerusalem. Combined with earlier coverage including the Sydney Morning Herald and the Times of Israel, these sources demonstrate Katz’s notability through his professional accomplishments and influence on Israeli cuisine. Orlando Davis (talk) 02:28, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just found two additional sources from a previous deletion discussion about Katz that ended in Keep: Dining: A Gourmet Experience, which notes that he is a member of Belgium’s Association of Master Chefs, and Israeli Cuisine with Chef Michael Katz, which describes him as one of Israel’s top chefs. I also added links to the books Israel: The Complete Guide with Biblical Sites, Desert Adventures and Seaside Resorts (Abdou et al., 1999) and The Chef’s Kitchen (Aner & Rabin, 1999), which are reliable, independently published sources from recognized publishers, and provide verifiable coverage of Michael Katz’s professional work, and therefore further support his notability on Wikipedia.” Orlando Davis (talk) 03:10, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Orlando Davis Can you show me the WP:BESTTHREE? Katz does not (yet) meet WP:GNG. Polygnotus (talk) 13:20, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure which three sources are the absolute best because I haven’t read them all yet, but these three are definitely solid:

• The Jerusalem Post — a well-known English-language Israeli daily with a reputation for editorial independence — provides independent coverage of Katz’s career, including his training in Michelin-star kitchens, teaching at Le Cordon Bleu in London, and his role at Adom/Edom restaurants. This is not an interview, as it is a review of the food he prepared.
• The Philippine Daily Inquirer’s lifestyle section, part of a major broadsheet with editorial oversight, reviews Katz’s cuisine and gives meaningful coverage of his professional work. (Philippine Daily Inquirer – Wikipedia) This is also a review, not an interview.
• The Times of Israel is a reliable independent source that reviews Katz’s food rather than interviewing him, confirming his role as a chef and highlighting his professional prominence. It also notes his membership in the Belgian Association of Master Chefs and his teaching at Le Cordon Bleu in London.

All three sources are independent, secondary, and not self-published, meeting Wikipedia’s general notability guideline (WP:N). You can see how Wikipedia evaluates the Jerusalem Post and the Times of Israel here: (Wikipedia: Reliable sources – Perennial sources)

Thank you for your time and input! Orlando Davis (talk) 18:19, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Orlando Davis No I mean sources that provide significant coverage about Michael Katz. Significant coverage addresses the topic directly and in detail.

• jpost contains 7 sentences about him, hardly in-depth.
• lifestyle.inquirer.net is a lifestyle blog. Sure, it is hosted on the same domain, but it isn’t a reliable source since it is a lifestyle blog; not a reliable source of information. Interviews are where journalists write down what people say, not an independent source of information. It contains 6 sentences about him.
• That ToI link contains 4 sentences about him, if we are generous. So that doesn’t meet WP:INDEPTH.

Polygnotus (talk) 23:36, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, do you have a COI or do you get paid to edit? Because dude worked at a booth at a tourism fair (according to the source) for 5 days and you describe that as him being “an ambassador of Israeli cuisine”. Polygnotus (talk) 23:42, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith. I have no conflict of interest; I’m taking part in this discussion because I believe the subject meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. The article also passed a deletion review in 2019, which further supports its long-term notability.

To help address the sourcing concerns raised here, I’ve added three additional reliable secondary sources, including the books The Jewish Kitchen, and The Foods of Israel, and an article from Haaretz. I initially thought the existing sources were sufficient to demonstrate notability under WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV, but since questions remain, I’m happy to continue improving the article. I’ve already identified several more high-quality sources that can be added.

I’m committed to working collaboratively to ensure the article aligns with policy and is supported by strong, verifiable sourcing. Orlando Davis (talk) 00:21, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Orlando Davis Are you saying that people who have a conflict of interest/are getting paid must be editing in bad faith?? Are you sure ? The rules are quite clear: paid editing is allowed, although disclosure is required. COI editing is allowed, and advice is provided how to do it properly.

I object to you characterizing all paid editors and all people with a conflicts of interest as bad faith editors.

People keep showing up on Wikipedia to passionately defend some obscure chef who never really achieved much in the culinary world. That includes multiple accounts by paid editors but also the username “Chef Michael Katz”. And since you write about builders of scale models of ships and Michael Katz builds scale models of ships it is difficult to not see a connection.

The fact that a book contains a recipe by him doesn’t really do much for notability. What we need is significant coverage in reliable sources, independent of the subject. Polygnotus (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn’t mean to imply that COI editing is bad faith, and I apologize if it came across that way—that wasn’t my intention.

Regarding The Jewish Kitchen: the book mentions Katz’s recipes on pages 18, 35, 157, and 158, and also notes that his restaurant, Michael Andrews, was highly acclaimed. Please give me a bit more time, as I’m still working through several additional sources I’ve found. Orlando Davis (talk) 01:04, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I collaborated with a paid editor, and have helped a bunch of COI editors. As long as they are willing to follow our rules they are welcome.

Bad faith edits are vandalism, hoaxes, trolling et cetera.

WP:RELIST says In general, a discussion should not be relisted more than twice but we are not in a hurry and there is no deadline so I don’t have objections to relisting for a third or fourth time. Polygnotus (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What we lack is reliable sources with significant coverage about Michael Katz. All these sources that just mention his name, but aren’t actually about him, do not contribute to notability. Polygnotus (talk) 02:18, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]