Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuart Slotnick


 * 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. The consensus is that there is enough third-party significant coverage, just barely, to warrant inclusion. Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 04:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Stuart Slotnick

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non notable. there are only passing mentions in third party sources, but no independent coverage specifically about him. Theserialcomma (talk) 19:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep based on a quick search. Nominator is right in that the article's references are mainly mentions of his name, but there's also this article about him in The American Prospect. If you combine that with the many, many quotes, I think this should pass WP:GNG; a more thorough search might reveal enough to make this a strong keep. Drmies (talk) 19:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Man, do I apologize for that one misplaced apostrophe. Sorry for shouting. Drmies (talk) 22:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * okay, so there is one piece of independent coverage. if there is more, i would say keep. but just one article shouldn't be enough Theserialcomma (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * One piece, which I found immediately using nothing but Google News. Did you consider what is laid out in WP:BEFORE before you made the nomination? Spending a minute or two just Googling should do the trick, considering that there's a dozen or more references in the article that mention him--and lots of mentions do help toward notability. Drmies (talk) 22:52, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - prominent enough attorney, represented American Apparel when sued by Woody Allen, and is "managing shareholder" of a notable New York City law firm. 18:45, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 23:54, 20 September 2009 (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.