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. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:44, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yuval Boger[edit]

Yuval Boger (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Frankly, this may have been a candidate for BLP-PROD but in deference to the very old age of the page I'll run as an AFD. There's no credible evidence of the subject's notability and appears to fail WP:GNG pretty clearly. Zero real cites on the page and Google News turns up zero credible independent sources about the subject (rather than quotes from the subject and mentions in passing). Given the page's age I'd love to be wrong, but I'm not seeing it. 49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (talk) 06:49, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• DeleteWeak keep. No significant coverage found this is independent of his companies, although he gets quite a few mentions in the context of those companies. --Michig (talk) 07:42, 14 January 2019 (UTC) Changed to weak keep in light of the sources identified below. I'm not totally convinced yet, but am erring on the side of keeping. --Michig (talk) 20:18, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 08:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 08:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Has sustained coverage (including coverage of the coverage - e.g. Globes and Haaretz covering Washington Post's placement of Boger on the cover - and on the way doing INDEPTH coverage themselves in 2007). WaPo covered him a few times - 2015, 2003, 2007. And there's quite a bit more - this is a serial entrepreneur with coverage spanning some two decades. Icewhiz (talk) 08:52, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete WaPo isn’t enough, there has to be actual profiles on him as the businessman. Trillfendi (talk) 18:54, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, what is needed is significant accomplishment and WP:SIGCOV - which need not be a profile. SIGCOV in sentences and paragraphs can suffice.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Sources including Washington Post: Business Rx: Will this maker of virtual reality goggles be able to see its path to growth? and CBS News (national) coverage of his role at Sensics: Scientists Develop Brain-Wave Binoculars support notability. there are lots more in searches. And the fact that he is a "serial entrepreneur" who has led 4 bluelinked tech firms is prima facie evidence of notability. Page, which lacked even a Reflist when brought to AfD, needs improvement.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:47, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete does not meet WP:ANYBIO; significant RS coverage not found. Sources offered above are passing mentions and / or WP:SPIP. For example, the WaPo piece is a pitch from Boger:

With advances in technology and mass-produced, high-quality displays now much more affordable because of the proliferation of smart phones, Boger saw new opportunities for Sensics.

"We are exploring new applications in the gaming industry. We partnered with a company called Razer, a global leader in products for gamers, to create virtual reality headsets."

Etc. Just a promotional CV. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• There are articles about him in WP:RS, from which I have just sourced details of his BIO.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:20, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Oh, 2011 wasn't so long ag... what, eight years already? -- NoCOBOL (talk) 06:50, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Note that User:NoCOBOL, while is a very new editor with few edits - I have no idea what his comment means.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:40, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• delete I don't see the significant independent coverage I believe is needed to meet the GNG. I'm seeing passing mentions and some interviews of him promoting his company's products, but that's what I expect from any company's chief marketing officer.Sandals1 (talk) 15:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• User:Sandals1 is an editor with a highly unusual editing record, and a talk page dominated by sockpuppet investigations. I have not looked beyond the talk page, Sandals1's talk page. But it is odd to have 2 editors with such unusual editing records show up at an obscure AfD.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:49, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is unusual to be accused of being a sockpuppet twice after only 5 edits, but nothing came of either of those unjustified allegations (both from the same editor).Sandals1 (talk) 00:16, 27 January 2019 (UTC) Looks like a duck to me[reply]

• Delete Fails WP:GNG. No WP:SIGCOV. The articles I read either talked about his company and mentioned him in relation to that company or talked to him about his company. Aurornisxui (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I do not see the significant independent coverage of him that I believe is needed to show he meets WP:GNG. He appears in the press in his role of marketing his company's products, but that's not about him. According to the Haaretz article both of the companies he founded went out of business. The claim that he was a founder of Oblicore (which I found in one article) is not supported by any documentation I can find. In fact, it is contradicted by both Bloomberg and Network World.[1] As marketing chief it's not surprising he's interviewed, but it's in line with his job and not because he's individually notable. The phrase "serial entrepreneur" is present in several articles in both English and Hebrew because I suspect that's part of his pitch (it's an odd phrase for a variety of reporters from different media and countries to all use). Papaursa (talk) 23:05, 4 February 2019 (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.