Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joan Hornig (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Consensus seems to be more or less the same as the prev afd - To keep the article, Don't think you'd gain any more !votes so wrapping it up (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 23:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Joan Hornig
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Although the other AfD was keep, I would like a fuller consensus to actually see if she's fully notable as my searches found not much better here, here, here and here. With this still existing since September 2008 with never much change, we need attention to see this needs to be kept. Pinging past commenters, and , ,  and  and I would've also notified  but it seems they're no longer much active. SwisterTwister  talk  06:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  06:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. Easily meets GNG both as a jeweller and as a philanthropist; doubly so for the combination. The fact that the article needs improvement does not alter that fact. Dozens of sources were mentioned in the previous AfD, and in fact that nominator withdrew the nomination. Here are some of hundreds of others: Full write-ups in the New York Times, Gotham , International Business Times , The Forward , and so on, just for a few, in addition to those cited in the previous AfD. Softlavender (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2015 (UTC); edited 08:24, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per my reasoning from the first AFD. -- Whpq (talk) 13:31, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:50, 11 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep per my previous rationale also. Also, I have to comment on the nominator's unhelpful habit of linking to general pages of Google search results as an argument. We have no way of telling which specific links on the results page we are supposed to be looking at, even assuming that we are seeing exactly the same results as they are and not an user-unique set of search results which may or may not be the same as what SwisterTwister sees. Mabalu (talk) 23:22, 12 October 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.