Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Aronowitz

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. Tone 16:35, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Aronowitz

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Greg Aronowitz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

No evidence of notability. Of the two sources cited in the article, one is a dead link for which I could not find an archived version or other replacement, and the other only makes a singe mention of Aronowitzh in passing. Nightscream (talk) 01:40, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 February 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:58, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:37, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:37, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:38, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, per nom. Nightscream (talk) 23:27, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: One reference is primary, the Blabbermouth reference seems to be irrelevant, and another is a dead link. Insufficient notability to meet WP:GNG --Whiteguru (talk) 10:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete prop designers are not notable for doing their job. We need actual sustained secondary source coverage to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:27, 19 February 2021 (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.