Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuval Elizur


 * 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 SPEEDY KEEP - consensus is that the article has enough notable reliable sources, and the COI/SPA user has been blocked. Tiggerjay (talk) 21:40, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Yuval Elizur

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

While references are provided, they are to sources which are self-published and/or COI sources. This page needs notable, third party sources. Tiggerjay (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2012 (UTC) Primary editor has a WP:COI and has WP:USERNAME problems; has deleted prior notices without discussion; and is disregarding notices left on their talk pages. Instead of attempting to resolve issues, they are being non responsive and editing around attempts to correct the problem. Tiggerjay (talk) 20:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The user has reached out to me via e-mail after having his account blocked. He is wanting to be constructive in contributing. I believe this article can be saved, and as additional people are looking into it more, it appears that there is some reliable sources that establishes notability. As such, I change my !vote to KEEP Tiggerjay (talk) 20:29, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree one hundred percent there is some sort of conflict of interest going. I have to at this time say this should be a strong keep my reasons being, this person has work in the Boston Globe, Jerusalam Post. Los Angeles times, Portsmouth Times, Tuscaloosa Times and the list goes on. I do think the article needs clean up for sure, but a coi and needing clean up doesn't take away from the notability that this person does indeed seem to have. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 20:54, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * If you feel that you can get the editor to work with you, and/or if you can do the research to establish non-original research to establish his notability, I would agree with your keep. Tiggerjay (talk) 21:31, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 *  delete  per nom. not notable and full of original research.  Dayyo Tim (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Struck as likely sock of banned user . CtP  (t • c) 00:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - per Foreign Affairs, "He was Deputy Editor of Maariv, Israel's mass circulation daily, as well as Israel Correspondent for The Washington Post and The Boston Globe"; could well be notable, if we get sources other than a spam account (since blocked) of a vanity press. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  22:30, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Ample information about him in the Jerusalem Post . His book is notable, so he passes WP:AUTHOR.    D r e a m Focus  10:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep The subject contribution to his field is amazing.Sorenaaryamanesh (talk) 19:48, 6 December 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.