Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carol Margolis


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 04:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Carol Margolis

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable person, fails WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:04, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  00:06, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  00:06, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  00:07, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete by WP:GNG Shad in Net 01:31, 19 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shad Innet (talk • contribs)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources that are actually about the subject needed to establish notability under WP:GNG.  Offered are a link to the subject's book on Amazon, obviously unhelpful, and links to several articles where the subject is quoted.  Those latter articles appear in reliable sources but being quoted, even by the NY Times, is unhelpful in the same way that an entire interview would be:  It's primary, as explained at WP:Interviews.  (The only difference between this and a full interview is there's less here.)  To be secondary, the article can't just quote the subject, it has to talk about the subject, which none of these sources do.  Msnicki (talk) 06:30, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - My searches (News, Books, browser, highbeam and thefreelibrary) found nothing aside from this and these seemed like someone else, not this Carol Margolis. SwisterTwister   talk  05:31, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete The sources tend to mention Margolis as just one of many people related to a subject.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:00, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable expert quoted often on the subject of business travel for women, described as an expert, quoted at length in the NY Times, also here, and here, described as a travel guru here, quoted in USA Today, numerous references (additional ones currently in article) suggests she meets the WP:GNG.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 22:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - she's been quote in many reliable sources; whether it's significant coverage is a separate issue. Bearian (talk) 14:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 ( Talk ) 14:47, 25 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:11, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete We can't sustain an article on quotes alone. Sam Walton (talk) 18:33, 11 July 2015 (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.