Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephanie Eisenberg (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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:46, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stephanie Eisenberg

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

This article was nominated 8 years ago for lack of notability. At that time, the article was kept largely, it appears, because of problems regarding the nominator. Past nomination problems aside, the subject doesn't meet WP:NBIO. The articles cited are not primarily about her, and I can't find anything new in the last 8 years beyond passing mentions ([1], [2], and [3] for example). agtx 17:02, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The sources in the article only quote or mention Eisenberg rather than write about her, and I too have been unable to find any better sources online, and, for a notable New Yorker active in the last 20 years, I would expect sources to be available online. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:49, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:59, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete When the NYT is covering real estate developments in Brooklyn as is the case in the cited article it is a local newspaper doing local reporting. This is not enough to turn a small scale real estate developer into a notable person.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:34, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and this is actually speedy material, simply having known news sources is not a basis at all for actual notability, since none of it is in fact convincing. SwisterTwister talk 05:56, 29 September 2016 (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.