Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dorit Ungar Black

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. Scope creep's concerns about the sources have remained unrebutted. Sandstein 08:58, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dorit Ungar Black[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)

Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV scope_creep^Talk 07:54, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:05, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete nothing indicates a passing of our notability criteria.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:25, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:28, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The sources appear to be reliable, and she appears to be notable in her particular field. I also find her age relative to her achievements and activities to be remarkable. There is enough here for an encyclopedia article in my mind.--Concertmusic (talk) 19:30, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see you always vote keep. How can she be notable, when the majority of the references are profile pages, one is a press-release and one is an interview. There is not a single WP:SECONDARY secondary source amongst the lot of them. scope_creep^Talk 19:58, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 03:21, 12 December 2020 (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.