Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Tabar

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Tabar

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

This article has been cobbled together from sources that are either not reliable, not independent or are not about the subject. This article fails Wikipedia:BASIC, and the subject is not notable.

[1] is a dead link
[2] has a one-line quote from the subject
https://article.wn.com/view/WNATca081dc8f5d90776aba7a664552561ad/ is a summary of a TV-appearance by the subject where he discussed his own company.
[3] is the subject's own website
[4] is an affiliated company's website, not an independent source
[5] is a press release
[6] is the subject discussing hedge fund launch strategies
[7] is a routine announcement of a career change
[8] cites the subject, but does not discuss him
[9] is a routine announcement of a career change
[10] is a blog, not a reliable source
[11] is a routine announcement of a career change
[12] was written by the subject
[13] is a contributor bio, not independent reporting
[14] is a press release Mduvekot (talk) 18:08, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 18:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 18:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 18:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 18:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per nom. Refbombing thirteen references at the end of a sentence in the lead does not advance WP:notability. According to the ABA there are 1.1 million licensed attorneys in the United States alone so nothing "special" about this person to warrant an article. Otr500 (talk) 06:28, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete another overly promotional article on a non-notable lawyer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:39, 30 January 2018 (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.