Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rotem Guez


 * 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. Michig (talk) 16:37, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Rotem Guez

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable persons biography disguised as a not notable lawsuit    You  really  can  00:30, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

*Keep possibly speedy. There are tons of news articles on this person. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 03:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC) Striking comment. I didnt read gnews hits properly: it was VERY late. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 10:55, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete- 'Tons of news articles' with nearly the exact same coverage of WP:BLP1E, his name change to highlight his legal difficulties, which had not previously achieved significant coverage or notability. Dru of Id (talk) 04:42, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with Dru of Id. Bgwhite (talk) 08:37, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I too agree that it is a WP:BLP1E, not a true biography but an article about a non-notable lawsuit and publicity stunt.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  16:58, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete – No substantial coverage by reliable third party sources, failing WP:GNG. No independent notability under WP:BLP1E. JFHJr (㊟) 19:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Neither Guez nor the lawsuit are notable. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:16, 24 January 2012 (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.