Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay Moloney

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 keep. RL0919 (talk) 02:21, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jay Moloney[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)

Contested PROD. No real indication of notability other than as part of Creative Artists Agency; would consider a merge into that, but the few references don't really indicate significant notability. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

~~Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC)~~[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:46, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:47, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a non-notable talent agent.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep due to having obituaries in the Guardian and Variety. ミラ P 06:05, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:42, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Obituaries are not examples of WP:SIGCOV. People pay for them to be included, so it's definitely not independent. Bait30 ^Talk? 06:18, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not all obituaries are paid. The one in The New York Times was paid but the ones in Variety and international publications are indicative of notability. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 14:02, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Searching Google Books and newspaper databases brought many articles on the man's rise and fall. He was also inspiration for a character in a film. I have added these sources and the information to the article. There is more out there that I could add, but I believe with these 15 sources his notability is more apparent now. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 14:02, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the citations are clearly after his death, for the most part they aren't obituaries.The articles in Newsweek, People, NYTimes and variety are about his life and death, with general conversation about what his death may mean about the business/culture/lifestyle that surrounded him in life. I certainly agree I would prefer to see citations about his general notability that were published while he was alive, but for better or worse his life and death combined appears to have been a notable subject, and therefore acceptable to have an article in Wikipedia's main namespace. -Markeer 19:50, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.NotButtigieg (talk) 14:55, 3 January 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.