Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Spitalny

: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. Agreement that the subject does not meet notability standards for an article in the encyclopedia. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:29, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

=[[Jonathan Spitalny]]=

:{{la|Jonathan Spitalny}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jonathan_Spitalny Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Jonathan Spitalny}})

The subject has played a bit role in Trump University. As far as I can tell he's received almost no coverage in the reliable sources, and the coverage he has received has been insignificant. I suggest this article be WP:BLARred. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:30, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Delete and a redirect would be of little value. Minor figure in the creation of Trump University. Aside from his current and former employers, reliable sources yield zero biographical depth to support an article. The New York Post article listing some of the business deals he made is clearly not enough to pass WP:BIO. The article's creator says on the talk page that they found "interesting" information. They need to produce non-trivial coverage by independent reliable sources to prove it. • Gene93k (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Delete When you have to give a horribly worded quote to try and make the person look notable because there are no public sources that actually explain what he really did, than he is clearly not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:04, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Delete - Subject is not notable and if the one think was notable it would still only be one event. Allaboutjane8181 (talk) 23:41, 11 June 2016 (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.