Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Doron


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Helen Doron

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable person. Yes, there are hits for her and her method, but they all seem to be press releases and fairly brief mentions. There's one mention of her here, as a linguist, but that's about all I could find. Note that this article comes with Helen Doron English, which I nominated for CSD G11; there's an associated sandbox as well, User:Nfleischer/sandbox. That user and a few others seem to have done little else on Wikipedia besides writing up/promoting Helen Doron. Drmies (talk) 03:23, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:36, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:36, 16 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. A rewrite removing promotional material would leave virtually nothing. I too noted that Jedynak references Doron but I was unable to see her reference 98 in --Senra (talk) 14:24, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Promotional without evidence of notability. Close to a G11 speedy. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:32, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Against Delete. She is referred to in several articles about languqge studies and the method is being used in quite alot of places. I think it should stay. Also, she wrote a lot of language teaching songs, which qualifies her as eglibe for article. - Dweck (talk) 08:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.69.179.98 (talk)
 * Keep I added references and links to studies on her work. She passes GNG and her work has been studied pretty extensively in Poland and Czech republic. Maybe a Polish or Czech Wikipedian can add more refs. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I also removed promotional wording and hopefully the article is more NPOV now. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:41, 20 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep With the current sources, including several major newspapers and some journal articles, seems to me to meet GNG. 1bandsaw (talk) 17:28, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as the article has RS references and these show that the subject has made a notable contribution in the field of education specifically language teaching ,I think WP: GNG is passed.Atlantic306 (talk) 00:25, 24 January 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.