Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miriam Berkowitz

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. czar 20:34, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miriam Berkowitz[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)

Non-notable rabbi. BLP with no RS. Mentioned in passing in one of the external links, the two others are primary sources. Not found anything else relevant online. Mottezen (talk) 06:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Mottezen (talk) 06:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Mottezen (talk) 06:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Mottezen (talk) 06:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Mottezen (talk) 06:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Mottezen (talk) 06:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 06:51, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable enough to guarantee her inclusion in Wikipedia just because pieces of her own writing about other things can be found to verify that she exists — the notability test does not hinge on the ability to verify that she's been the author of content about other things so much as it does the ability to verify that she's been the subject of media coverage written by other people. Bearcat (talk) 14:16, 17 May 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.