Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuval tisf Nativ

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:42, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yuval tisf Nativ

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

Non-notable individual lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Provided references are from company website and a brief mention in WSJ. Fails WP:BIO. reddogsix (talk) 09:04, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:07, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:08, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:08, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. GregJackP Boomer! 11:23, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems notable to me and it's not just a mention in the WSJ, the guy is quoted. Tags have been added that I don't believe are fair, such as the COI tag. Nothing can be inferred by usernames about the COI. I'm usually the first one to delete, but this one seems to have the notability required. Regards, --Man way 14:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The subject of the Wikipedia article is not substantially covered in the WSJ article. He is only quoted a couple of times - far from non-trivial coverage. Concerning the COI, the author is a student of the subject. Per WP:COI, "You should also avoid writing about yourself or people you know in articles on other topics." "If you have a personal connection to a topic or a person, (such as being an employee, familial ties, or other relationship), you are advised to refrain from editing articles directly, and to provide full disclosure of the connection." My best to you. reddogsix (talk) 15:37, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A mention in WSJ does not equal notability -- Y not? 16:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If there are any reliable sources at all, they sure are hard to find. I came up with nothing. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:11, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete:lack of substantial coverage in reliable independent secondary sources. Like Amatulic, I could find nothing even remotely promising, only tangential mentions. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 11:42, 2 August 2013 (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.