Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendy Seltzer

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 of the debate was no consensus, keep. Johnleemk | Talk 07:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wendy Seltzer

This article was previously nominated for a speedy. This article attempts to establish notability, though whether it satisfies WP:BIO is up for debate. IMO, it doesn't, so I believe it should be deleted. --Deathphoenix 08:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I don't think founding an online EFF rights thing is notable, and that is pretty much the only claim made. --Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 11:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I was the original nominator for speedy deletion. She does not appear to pass the professor test. Lbbzman 15:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. Dustimagic 19:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. The Chilling Effects Clearinghouse is a significant organization; Seltzer is generally identified as its founder; and her name pulls up Google hits in the low six-figure range. Certainly more notable (and higher ranked by Google) than Kadee Strickland. Monicasdude 23:23, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Harvard fellow and, judging from Google, often cited. Seems noteworthy. Wisco 05:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Judging from the article alone, she does not seem to be too notable, but a Google search, even using her name as an exact phrase and adding the "law" and "privacy" keywords, turns up thousands of results. Johnleemk | Talk 10:53, 8 January 2006 (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.