Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan M. Greenberg

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. ‑Scottywong| verbalize _ 21:22, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alan M. Greenberg

Alan M. Greenberg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Despite apparent good works, I am unable to find reliable, secondary sources which evidence the notability of this real estate investor and CSP founder under WP:BASIC. Hard to tell how much coverage is in "A Fuller Life", the article describes that the book notes his expertise in film history, which feels like a passing reference to me, but even if that book were an in-depth source, we'd still need a second such source. Additional sources welcome, as always. joe decker^{talk to me} 18:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm the author of this article. Would links to correspondence between Alan M. Greenberg and his interviewees attesting to the fact they participated in the CSP qualify as a reliable secondary source? Fleurdelis4ever (talk) 08:56, 7 April 2012 (UTC) — Fleurdelis4ever (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  Hi Fleurdelis4ever. Thanks for participating. In my view, I would certainly agree that published correspondence would go towards verifying that participation, but it's a tougher call as to whether that demonstrates notability--in general we prefer that articles have enough sources that have been through an editorial process that we have some hope of being able to write from a neutral point of view. The various links are to the relevant policies, which .. well, some of our policy jargon can be a little peculiar at times, so I thought they might help. Cheers, --joe decker^{talk to me} 15:43, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That would not help IMO. The fact that he enlisted notable people in his project does not convey notability to him. Notability is not inherited per Wikipedia policy. --MelanieN (talk) 15:43, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not notable. Cagoul (talk) 23:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Vanity project. Non-notable. Softlavender (talk) 12:20, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's hard to see what is supposed to be notable here. He created and teaches (or taught?) a non-credit class for foreign-born college students; that appears to be it. No coverage found at Google News. The article lacks basic details such as the name of the organization or college through which the class(es?) is (are?) offered, whether any other teachers are involved, how often or for how long the classes have been offered, etc. It's possible that additional detail would add to the case for notability. --MelanieN (talk) 15:43, 13 April 2012 (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.