Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark S. Golub


 * 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 borderline. Nonetheless, editors are encouraged to make improvements to the article, if any. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃  (ICE-T • ICE CUBE) 04:15, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Mark S. Golub

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

There doesn't seem to be much evidence of notability for this individual, outside of the television channel they founded. QueenofBithynia (talk) 21:31, 22 March 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:57, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, Radio, Judaism,  and Connecticut.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:11, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, without prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can actually do better. Founding a television channel is not an "inherent" notability guarantee that automatically entitles a person to have a standalone biographical article on that basis per se; he would still have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about that work. But the footnoting here depends 75 per cent (6/8) on primary source content self-published by his own companies, which is not support for notability; a seventh source is an award referenced to the awarding organization's own self-published press release, which is not support for notability (an award cannot make its winners notable for winning it if the award is not itself established as a notable award by virtue of being referenceable to third-party coverage in real media); and the only footnote that actually comes from a real third-party media outlet gives him a grand total of 11 words of coverage in a listicle, which is not enough media coverage to vault him over GNG all by itself. Bearcat (talk) 14:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:BASIC/WP:GNG, e.g. From Russia With News: TV Station May Be Bought (NYT, 2000), Shalom fills niche with Jewish shows (Chicago Tribune, 2006), Shalom TV reaches 15 million households (Mercury News, 2008), Using Television To Educate And Inform The Jewish World: An Interview with Jewish Broadcasting Service President and CEO Mark S. Golub (Jewish Press, 2015), JBS wins Rockower Award (Jewish Ledger, 2015), Stamford rabbi’s TV network goes national (Stamford Advocate, 2016), As seen on (Jewish) TV (Jewish Standard, 2018), The Man Behind The Jewish PBS Has A Plan To Put His Show On The Map (NY Jewish Week, 2019). Also: Mark S. Golub Broadway and Theatre Credits (Broadway World). Beccaynr (talk) 23:24, 29 March 2022 (UTC) sources added to comment Beccaynr (talk) 23:32, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Would a redirect be considered by participants here? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Beccaynr has found some good sources to establish notability Rlink2 (talk) 17:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
 * weak delete It seems that almost all coverage is about the TV news channel and mentions the person only in passing. I think this would warrant an article about Shalom TV but not about Golub himself. --hroest 13:49, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment In my comment above, my focus was on sources with more than passing mentions about Golub and his career that could help further develop the article, including because per WP:BASIC, If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. More sources about him and his career include: Jewish TV network finally arrives … if you have Comcast (The Jewish News of Northern California, 2008), Stamford rabbi launches Jewish-American TV network (The Hour, 2013), Conversation with Rabbi Mark Golub: Defining – and creating – “Jewish television” (Jewish Ledger, 2013), Rabbis Share Their High Holiday Sermons (Forward, 2019). Reviews for some of the Broadway shows he has a producer credit on include: Hollywood Reporter 2012, Variety 2017, Hollywood Reporter 2017, Variety 2019. Beccaynr (talk) 14:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:BASIC with sources presented by Beccaynr. They're reliable enough IMV. SBKSPP (talk) 00:28, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Yes, they are reliable but they are passing mentions. The two interviews are primary. I would suggest an article on the channel. which would better address the sources, as they don't do this article any justice, but currently, there is no secondary sources that not passing mentions, owners, credit lists and so on for the subject. Some of them very poor. Not one that is in-depth and secondary that is reliable. It is below borderline.   scope_creep Talk  18:24, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment A sensible alternative to deletion would be to redirect to Jewish Broadcasting Service. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 18:59, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete per User:Scope creep Voted on wrong AFD. Rlink2 (talk) 22:35, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You have voted twice, once for delete, for keep???   scope_creep Talk  22:51, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @ Whoops, wrong AFD. Silly me again..... Rlink2 (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. The Chicago Tribune and Mercury News sources found by  look to me like they meet the bar of  WP:SIGCOV of the subject.  (As I've said before, there is a sensible target for a redirect, and this would be preferable to deletion, but I don't think deletion is called for.)  Lots of promotional language and unsourced material needs to be cut out, but WP:DINC. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 23:50, 6 April 2022 (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.