Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randy Goldberg

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Randy Goldberg}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Randy Goldberg}})

An article, created by an WP:SPA on an individual that does not appear to pass the WP:GNG. None of the sources included in the article are actually any kind of coverage on him that would establish notability - they are simply short interviews, mostly of the sort that are used to fill up time on slow news days. Searching for sources did not turn up any kind of coverage that was actually about him that would establish notability. The article was previously WP:PRODed shortly after creation, but was de-prodded by the article creator, so it has to go to AFD. Rorshacma (talk) 05:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Astrology. Rorshacma (talk) 05:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 06:51, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. This Randy Goldberg (not to be confused with the co-founder of Bombas) seems pretty clearly non-notable: a few non-independent interviews/passing quotations are the only sources we have. There's no in-depth coverage in reliable independent sources, so he fails the GNG, as far as I can tell. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:19, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oh, by the way: the initial PROD was a BLPPROD, and per WP:BLPPROD {{tq|BLP articles may still be nominated for standard PROD...even if an article has previously been flagged for BLPPROD and declined}}, so in theory the article was still PROD-eligible (although coming to AfD is fine too, of course). Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:24, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
• Delete I'm not finding sources that would support notability. The WaPo article listed here is in the local "Metro" section. To me that says that the newspaper did not consider it worthy of being in the general publication. There are a few paragraphs in that but that's only one semi-interesting source. Lamona (talk) 05:44, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.