Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronny Douek

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 no consensus. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 04:15, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ronny Douek

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete, is not clear the person actually meets the notability policy. It reads more like a political career circle jerk article. Article is largely unsourced for a BLP the one source provided appears to be about something else Hell in a Bucket (talk) 09:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 10:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerlyHMSSolent)}|lambast 10:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep To be sure, the article is (or was), as nominator Hell in a Bucket says, poorly sourced and poorly organized in a self-promotional style. However, googling "Ronny Douek" even in Engligh immediately turns up substantive coverage of him founding both for- and non-for-profit organizations, and being in the leadership of major organizations. Deletion, as I understand it, is about whether a subject merits an article, as determined by coverage in secondary sources. This guy is clearly notabe, he just needs a better article. I added the first several articles about him to the article, which needs major edit. ShulMaven (talk) 11:05, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e decker ^talk 15:05, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I made some edits to the article, but unfortunately I do not find strong sources for this person. The references that are on the article do not say much about him -- one is even about the architectural bona fides of a building he bought. Most of the others are mentions of him in short news articles. I turn up nothing substantial about him. LaMona (talk) 05:17, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.