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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. GirthSummit _(blether) 12:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey H. Friedman

[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The article has been written in a promotional way as per WP:PROMO and therefore breaches WP:NPOV. Abishe (talk) 01:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Abishe (talk) 01:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Abishe (talk) 01:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - With the caveat I might just be missing something. There doesn't seem to be a ton of coverage on him. There's a couple details that may make him notable, but as of now I'm leaning towards deleting it. EverybodyEdits (talk) 22:07, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete local coverage of a 70th birthday party is not enough to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:57, 24 August 2020 (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.