Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Grossman (consultant)


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:36, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

David Grossman (consultant)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable founder of probably non notable PR company. His books are self-published by AuthorHouse and is essentially no libraries, a/c WorldCat/

The refs are either about the agency or are trivial. agency  DGG ( talk ) 00:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - I like Grossman's work on the interaction between employees and the workplace in the digital age and find it notable enough to have been cited in a lot of different sources, though I wrote this long ago and see the point regarding the book (didn't know AuthorHouse was a self-publisher). Jeremy112233 ( Lettuce-jibber-jabber? ) 15:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep, many mention-type references but some are in-depth like this one. Article is bloated, feels promotional, probably needs much trimming.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete and draft & userfy if needed for improvements as my searches found nothing convincingly better and the current article is questionable for actual independent notability. SwisterTwister   talk  06:52, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:09, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per the significant coverage in this article in The Globe and Mail and this article in Credit Union Times. Cunard (talk) 06:00, 14 March 2016 (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.