Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Jay Wienbarg (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 speedy delete. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 18:21, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

George Jay Wienbarg[edit]

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

The article is very lengthy, but it does not particularly show that the subject is in any way notable. Most of the article is full of useless puffery, parts of it are sourced to IMDB, and parts of it are sourced to the subject's own entry on an autobiography website. None of this content can be independently confirmed nor is it actually any relevant to the coverage of this individual, even if he was considered notable. In addition the subject who edits as Georgewienbarg (talk · contribs) has heavily contributed to the article, inflating his own status on this project. I have also put up a related article David Capurso for deletion, as these two worked with each other to create each other's Wikipedia pages and neither of them are particularly notable for coverage on this project. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It has come to my attention that this is the fifth time that this page has existed, as there was an AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Wienbarg when the title was George Wienbarg and parts of it were previously userfied to User:Georgewienbarg. If at all possible, both locations should be salted to prevent this individual from ever creating a biography again.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:08, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 3 July 2011 (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.