Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Haskvitz (2nd nomination)

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. Daniel (talk) 04:27, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Haskvitz[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Second nomination; the last one was a "no consensus" in 2014. Sounds like he had an interesting career, but I don't think this meets the notability hurdle as there is no significant, in-depth, independent coverage. Neutrality^talk 02:19, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep clearly notable given all the awards ~~and a obituary in a (local) newspaper.~~ --hroest 13:45, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The obituary looks like a paid obituary rather than a staff-written one. The awards don't establish significant in-depth coverage independent of the subject. Neutrality^talk 14:09, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I considered that but I think this is the paid one. I am also not claiming that the obituary by itself gives notability but based on the prior discussion and all arguments I concluded that he is notable. --hroest 16:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Both of these appear to be paid obits, just in different local papers: the first in Pasadena Star-News and the second in Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. Neutrality^talk 17:27, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I retract my statement regarding the obituary. I also share your concerns regarding RS, it seems they are very sparse and from the ones in the article it seems only [1] has any info about him, a source I have never heard of before. On the other hand, some RS may be pre-internet. --hroest 01:30, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the awards does not have the independent coverage that is needed to show notability, and even a staff written obituary in a hyper local paper would not be in and of itself a sign of notability. There is nothing here even remotely suggesting that Haskvitz was notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:28, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG.--MadD ^(talk) 11:15, 8 April 2021 (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.