Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ailene Light

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. --Coredesat 02:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ailene Light

Ailene_Light (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

There is no assertion of notability except from its own sources. There are just about no external reviews of this subject, and a search reveals very little about this subject. On concern here is Wikipedia:Attribution and Wikipedia:Notability. This subject seems very obscure (not very well known) to be posted in an encyclopedia. --Snooziums 20:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: Snooziums may be listing these as a response to another AFD, rather than on their particular merit or lack thereof. Snooziums, have you read WP:POINT?

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 17:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment: Well ... while I believe Snooziums has made a string of bad faith nominations, this article deserves to be shot down on the merits. RGTraynor 05:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment You may well be right. Once I figured out what Snooziums was doing, I just slapped the note on all of the proposed deletes. I don't really have time to check every one of these for value.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 16:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, per my nomination. --Snooziums 20:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 10:29, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, NN. 86 directed Google hits [1], and probable WP:COI as well; the only Wiki contributions of the creator are this article and adding "Ailene Light" to various lists and links on various psychic-related articles. RGTraynor 16:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as advertisement for apparently not well known psychic; the site does not even list any references to purported articles about her--which is even less than usual.DGG 00:23, 13 March 2007 (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.