Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronald Alepian


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 04:08, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Ronald Alepian

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. WP:BLP of a public relations strategist, written like a résumé rather than an encyclopedia article and not based on enough solid sourcing to pass WP:GNG. Of the 32 sources being cited here, ten are just glancing namechecks of his existence as a giver of soundbite in an article that isn't about him; seven are primary sources such as press releases from his own companies; five are unsubstantive blurbs; five verify tangential facts about his companies while failing to even contain a mention of his name at all; three are dead links; and one is a simple directory listing. Literally the only reference in the entire article that's substantively about Alepian is #1, and it's a profile in the alumni magazine of his alma mater -- so it would be acceptable for some supplementary verification of facts if the rest of the sourcing around it were much more solid, but it cannot bring GNG by itself as the article's only non-primary, non-blurby, non-soundbitey source. A person like this is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because he exists; he gets a Wikipedia article when he can be properly referenced over GNG. Bearcat (talk) 13:12, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 13:13, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:20, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete The sourcing is not at a level to show that Alepian is notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2017 (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.