Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheryll Barron: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Shell Kinney (talk | contribs) Closing debate; result was Delete. Subject may barely pass WP:BIO, request respected. |
m Bot: Fixing lint errors, replacing obsolete HTML tags: <font> (7x) Tag: Fixed lint errors |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 9:
===[[Cheryll Barron]]===
Subject requests deletion. Feels that she doesn't meet criteria under [[WP:BIO]]. No opinion on the matter, just bringing it here as requested for a community decision. Shell <sup>[[User_talk:Shell_Kinney|babelfish]]</sup> 13:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
*'''Weak delete''' With a published book from a major publisher, she does pass my inclusion criteria. However, I feel we should respect subjects' wishes when they don't want to have an article (though obviously only in borderline cases). [[User:Starblind|Andrew Lenahan]] - <b><
* '''Weak keep''' With the unreferenced bit about her opinions on people from another nation removed, now a very flattering biography of a notable author and writiter. [[User:Hipocrite|Hipocrite]] - [[User talk:Hipocrite|«<small>Talk</small>»]] 15:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
* '''Weak delete'''. Anti-vanity just swings it. -- [[User:Gareth Owen|GWO]]
*'''Keep''' - Err ... where does the subject request deletion? The Talk page references inaccuracies, but the article now seems quite well sourced. Even given that, her publishing credits pass the [[WP:BIO]] bar. [[User:
:She wrote to [[m:OTRS]] to request deletion in addition to emailing Jimbo. Shell <sup>[[User_talk:Shell_Kinney|babelfish]]</sup> 19:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' subject does seem to meet inclusion criteria; article is well-referenced and there's sufficient information already available to the general public elsewhere. If there is another reason for wishing to be deleted (such as a legal issue) I would suggest requesting an [[WP:OFFICE|office action]]. [[User:Ziggurat|<
*'''Weak delete'''. She isn't ''too'' notable (just [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Cheryll+Barron%22&hl=en&lr=&start=990&sa=N 75 Googles]), so we should respect her request for it to be deleted. -- [[User:King of Hearts|King of]] [[User:King of Hearts|<
*'''Weak delete''' Close but just not notable enough [[User:GassyGuy|GassyGuy]] 08:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. An orphan, to boot. Bare notability is necessary but not sufficient to keep an article. [[User:Sj|+sj ]][[User Talk:Sj|+]] 16:02, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. If the subject requests deletion, it's a matter of courtesy to delete. Anyway, people who want to know about her can go to Google. Wikipedia is not the only source of information.
*'''Week keep''' Same opinions as above but I also share
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||