Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay Solomon (2nd nomination)

From 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 delete. Dreadstar † 05:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jay Solomon

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/Jay Solomon Articles for deletion/Jay Solomon (2nd nomination)
Jay Solomon (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable individual. Only 1 reliable source in the article has significant coverage and the article overstates his notability with vague and non-neutral wording ("interviewed by various", "countless media outlets", "a dedicated following"). Mr.Z-man 22:47, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Delete. The sources cited in the original deletion debate contained University newsletters and appearances on local television some years ago. In reviewing the article, I can't see any basis for establishing that this individual has enough encyclopedic merit to retain this article. Cary Bass demandez 22:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep per the previous AfD. There was a clear consensus to keep there. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 11:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
    • The one a year ago? Mr.Z-man 04:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
    • Referring to previous consensus without justification in not sufficient. This article is poorly sourced, and not notable. Rotovia (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
    • It's barely been changed since the last nomination. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 06:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete Not notable; article has had enough time to establish notoriety Rotovia (talk) 12:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - Clear consensus to keep less then 2 weeks ago. ChessCreator (talk) 03:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Comment - Good point, my mistake. ChessCreator (talk) 16:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete marginally notable at best, subject requests deletion. No compelling reason not to accede to that. Guy (Help!) 21:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Tenuous notability at best -- Chabuk [ T • C ] 20:47, 5 April 2008 (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.