Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Barrows

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 KEEP. — JIP | Talk 09:55, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Alice Barrows

Article does not establish notability. She gave somebody some "unspecified information". --Lee Hunter 02:48, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Looks to be of some historical significance. Maybe merge into article on Red-scare, McCarthyism, etc.—Gaff ^ταλκ 03:28, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Thankfully, establishing notability is irrelevant to deletion policy. So is the comment about "unspecified information" - how about improving the article? Trollderella 03:48, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

WP is not an indiscriminate collection of information --Lee Hunter 11:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Content has been added and clarified (a portion of the decrypts were unrecoverable). nobs 03:58, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

A huge amount of fluff was added to make it look substantial. I still don't see anything there except for a name. When you boil it down the entire article is that this person gave some unspecified information to another person. That's it. The rest is all background information about other people --Lee Hunter 11:45, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per Lee Hunter. Maybe we should have an article on the "Wirt Incident" if it is as important as this article claims, and give Alice Barrows a mention there. But no more than that. flowersofnight 13:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and maybe if/when appropriate target is made, it can be merged/re-directed. --rob 14:09, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep: notable enough for me, merge later if appropriate. -- Kjkolb 18:36, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, assuming the sources are legitimate. --TantalumTelluride 22:27, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep communist infiltration. Klonimus 02:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Once you scrape away the background, there's nothing left that'S actually biographical. Less than a footnote in history. --Calton | Talk 00:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Googled both Barrows and Wirt with no hits on either one. They may have existed but they are evidently not noteworhty.-Dakota 00:55, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: it looks like there are a few relevant results, but not a lot. -- Kjkolb 11:55, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
• KEEP. This is a perfectly good article. What is great about Wikipedia is that more information can be added in the days to come. The person is of interest and note! The user who put this iformation up for deletion is a known censor on articles such as this. If the article is erased from Wikipedia it will never be allowed to be brought back. Absolutely notable. Keep! Dwain

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.