Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan D. Winitz

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. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:04, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jan D. Winitz

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

The article falls under WP:BLP and has the following issues:

WP:N Jan D. Winitz is an antique oriental rug collecter and dealer who is not widely known outside of San Francisco Bay Area art collector/antique oriental rug connoisseurship circles.
WP:V The references given for this article include:
- A write-up on Robb Report (a web-zine featuring directional content from luxury products providers);
- A piece in Gentry Home (a home-decorating magazine);
- A piece covering antique oriental rug collecting, shown in the Chubb Collectors Newsletter, featured on CHUBB's website (an insurance broker);
- An editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle.
Not featured as a reference in the article, but found during this discussion:
- A piece from the Wall Street Journal
WP:NOT Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet such requirements.
WP:NPOV One of the article's main contributors appears to have a close connection with its subject. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 22:50, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. 23:07, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 05:55, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 05:55, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 06:03, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

~~Delete~~ As nominator. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 00:41, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Striking your !vote. Your nomination counts as a delete !vote. Natg 19 (talk) 01:57, 18 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]
Delete I can add little to what was said in the nomination. Basically a total failure to have coverage outside of very promotional sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:32, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment He had a feature in the Wall Street Journal, found here and was covered in local San Fran media in the 1980s at least once ([1]). I think at least the former should be considered in this discussion. -Indy beetle (talk) 20:50, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- An article in the Wall Street Journal is not always clearcut journalism, as this piece from the WSJ's competitor Forbes explains. The piece in the WSJ may have originated from Tobin & Associates, a PR firm. Coincidentally enough, one of the principals at Tobin & Associates began their career at the San Francisco Chronicle. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 00:33, 14 December 2017 (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.