Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanley R. Zupnik

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 Soft delete. --MelanieN (talk) 21:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley R. Zupnik

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

non-notable per WP:BIO Deunanknute (talk) 22:50, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I agree on non-notable, but it's certainly true that there are not enough quality sources readily available. Two sources I found on Google books (which are not actually accessible, even though they are searchable), seem to indicate that he was the builder of Rosslyn Station (from Subway Magazine, Spring 1974, as cited in The Great Society Subway by Zachary Schrag). If there were good sources on this, I think we'd have to say he was notable. Regardless, I understand the reasons for deletion. If this occurs, we should delete his entry on Żupnik disambiguation; his dead link there was the reason why I created the page. Jeremiah (talk) 18:24, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (jaw) @ 21:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - based on past outcomes, producers are almost never notable merely for producing one or two films. Their notability is not inherited from the film they financed. Bearian (talk) 23:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam ^Sing! 07:10, 18 February 2015 (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.