Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darren Heitner (3rd nomination)

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. Secret ^account 19:34, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Darren Heitner

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

Negative BLP, but sourced.(were it not sourced it would be a speedy deletion) The individual is of very borderline notability at best, and I would have nominated the article for deletion even without the negative material. I came across the article myself, there is no request from the subject that I know of. The previous versions of the article were (in my opinion very correctly) deleted as promotional. DGG ( talk ) 02:27, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Do Not Delete Subject is notable, and everything is properly sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CardozoNinja (talk • contribs) 18:09, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 02:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jinkinson talk to me 02:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:05, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:05, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:05, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Extremely marginal, borderline notability as per nom. Repeated removal of negative material suggests COI editing and intent to use page as promotional material. Given that fact, this should just be deleted. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 05:23, 11 December 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.