Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Aranoff


 * 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. With all due respect to Protonk's view, the last 2 !voter's argument about the subject not passing WP:GNG carry the day and the fact that it's a poorly sourced BLP is relevant. If someone finds sources not mentioned here I'll be happy to userfy or incubate this article. Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:48, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Alan Aranoff

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:REFUND'ed PROD, however the original reason No significant coverage able to be found in independent reliable sources still applies so fails WP:GNG and is still unsourced. Mt king  (edits)  22:00, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article fails to explain why the subject is notable among architects and it's an unreferenced WP:BLP. Pburka (talk) 22:03, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * He doesn't have to explain why the subject is notable among architects. The subject must meet our notability guideline.  The use of the word notable is an unfortunate choice and does not reflect the general notability guideline in the slightest. Protonk (talk) 23:24, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You're right. I should have said important or significant. Pburka (talk) 12:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No, you shouldn't have. That's just the point.  There is nothing in the GNG about importance or significance.  Wikipedia is host to thousands of great articles on relatively unimportant subjects.  Take, for instance, Fast inverse square root.  The subject is almost completely unimportant.  It may be significant to a small group of people but in the grand scheme of things it is a few lines of code inside a 3d engine released more than a decade ago.  We have an article on it because it is the subject of multiple reliable sources all which cover it in significant detail.  That is the operative threshold. Protonk (talk) 23:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could explain, then, why WP:CSD includes the term important or significant? Pburka (talk) 02:41, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well part of my explanation is an admission that I'm not at all happy w/ the language in A7. It sets a perversely high bar.  However it is a necessary (in some respects) kludge.  Plenty of articles are created about bands, themselves, small companies where "importance" is a decent heuristic for a NPP or admin who is working through hundreds of articles per week.  I would prefer we didn't have it, as the baseline threshold for inclusion should be "does the subject have enough sourcing that we can meet NPOV, V and NOR."  The three core content policies (should) drive the bus. 04:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment in REFUND by IP, "Here is some [sources]: Progressive Architecture April 1993, The Making of Public Buildings; Book, The Supreme Court Building - Jerusalem, 1993 Yad Hanadiv; Alan Aranoff was the architect for the KSYM Synagogue, Modiin, Israel, 2011; Alan Steven Aranoff designed and authored Ichud Hayeshivot: Seminary and Housing, UCLA Architecture thesis/dissertation, Melvyl 1984, A New Brooklyn Museum: The Master Plan Competition, with Kohn Pedersen Fox, Rizzoli, 1988; designed The Be'er Sheva regional courts building with Barchana Architects; architectural design of the new home of the Israel Ice Hockey Federation." Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:33, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 23:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 23:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article fails to explain why the subject is notable among architects and it's an unreferenced WP:BLP. Quick online search returned no evidence of notability. The list of given sources are not cited in the article and it is not clear whether they include any in depth coverage of this person. Marokwitz (talk) 06:49, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete I could find no coverage of him except this man-on-the-street type quote at Google News, and this and this passing mentions in books. --MelanieN (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.