Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Margo Alexander

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:07, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Margo Alexander

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

Apparently-promotional article created as part of a batch of Haas-related articles (most of which have since been PRODed or AFDed). Low-quality referencing, questionable WP:GNG notability. Has been involved with possibly-noteworthy organisations, but I can't turn up much in the way of detail about her or how she passes notability. note: when searching for refs, do not confuse with the artist Margo Alexander (1894-1965). David Gerard (talk) 10:03, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 10:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 10:04, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 10:05, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. David Gerard (talk) 10:05, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:12, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable head of a non-profit organization.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:48, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as what's listed is not at all in fact substantiating her own independent notability and convincing, since it simply lists other named mentions of people or groups, along with named source mentions for this, none of that is actually convincing and can in fact lead to advertising if blatant. SwisterTwister talk 02:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. SST flyer 12:44, 27 October 2016 (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.