Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Mandel

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) 23:10, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Mandel[edit]

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

An unremarkable YouTuber; sourcing is not suitable for a BLP. Notability is not inherited from the better known father. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:34, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:45, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 18:46, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:15, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral - there is some coverage (around 88 google-news hits (after jumping to last)) - and actually some of it is from RS. While notability is not inherited, if you receive coverage due to being the son of, the coverage may make you notable. For instance these pieces - [1] [2].Icewhiz (talk) 06:52, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The coverage is not indepth enough to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:00, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per JPL; a WP:BEFORE brings up plenty of coverage in blogs, zines and other non-reliable sources; instead of 'umping to last' ;) I did a news-specific narrow search and came up with even more blogs, zines, etc, with an occasional local news outlet, in the coverage. No third party, independent coverage; fails WP:ANYBIO. — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 15:22, 29 April 2017 (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.