Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avram C. Freedberg


 * 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   no consensus. Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:18, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Avram_C._Freedberg
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

I don't feel the page meets notability standards. Rather, in my view, it seems to clearly meet the definition of what is not notable per WP:CRIME and WP:CREATIVE Kozitt (talk) 16:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  —Kozitt (talk) 16:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I dePRODDED this to prevent autodeletion. Meets GNG easily. Coverage runs for thirty years including an editorial in the New York Times. More people need to add Category:All articles proposed for deletion and Category:Proposed deletion to their watchlist. All it takes to lose an article without debate is one person to add the tag and it gets auto-deleted after a few days. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:55, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm all for keeping pages that have something to offer, and I think that the improvements you've made to the page are good. However, I still don't feel that this individual is notable, even if there's spotty coverage over a period of time.  The corporate information is already included on each company's page.  WP:CRIME and WP:CREATIVE are on point on this issue.  Continuing to consider businesspeople as noteworthy simply by virtue of their owning or contributing to a company turns Wikipedia into LinkedIn. Kozitt (talk) 20:14, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * 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.