Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Aviv (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 Deleted as G4; almost identical to the version deleted at AFD in 2011. — Diannaa (talk) 00:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don Aviv[edit]

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

Restarted after being deleted in 2011 but this imaginably is not going to be G4 material, my searches and examinations are not finding anything actually convincing considering he's not notable for WP: AUTHOR (no significant listings at WorldCat) and then not convincing for WP:PROF. SwisterTwister talk 16:52, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 16:53, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found this through the academics deletion sorting page but he's primarily an industry consultant, not an academic, and I don't think he passes WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR. The more appropriate notability standard is WP:GNG, but that requires multiple in-depth independent sources about the subject rather than publications by the subject or stories that briefly quote him as an expert. The only one we have about that is the reputation-communications interview from the external links, but that looks highly promotional, unsuitable as a reference, and in any case it's only one. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:30, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Changing to Speedy delete G4. I stand by my comment above but this is very similar to the previous deleted page. If I had discovered this before formulating an opinion in the AfD I would have gone ahead and done the speedy myself, but as it is I'm tagging the page {{db-g4}} and letting someone else do it. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:32, 30 August 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.