Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Bertman

: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 keep. (non-admin closure) Dusti^*poke* 05:41, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

=[[Jonathan Bertman]]=

:{{la|Jonathan Bertman}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Jonathan Bertman}})

Fails WP:PROF, and not otherwise quite notable enough. Created by User:Infomed, with possible WP:COI issues. Rd232 ^talk 02:58, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 05:55, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 05:55, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Keep - found plenty of news sources at the links above. See WP:BEFORE. Bearian (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
A handful of passing mentions, mostly in trade journals and a local newspaper, are not indicative of meeting WP:N. Do not presume the nominator hasn't bothered to look. Rd232 ^talk 18:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Keep. Per RS coverage, reflecting notability.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:46, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
such as? Rd232 ^talk 21:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Keep. Articles primarily about the subject in the AMA Newsletter, Modern Physician, and Providence Journal are enough to convince me of a pass of WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:50, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

: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.