Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katie Greenwood

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 no consensus for deletion, AfD does not govern merges and editors are free to pursue that as usual. I should note that more obviously reliable sources (such as the Hindustan Times) have been added to the article since this AfD began. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 17:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Katie Greenwood

Katie Greenwood (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Non-notable, girlfriend of former athlete Oden 08:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. MER-C 08:40, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep Only semi-notable per UK coverage of the incident: but this is a global encyclopedia. This can always be transwiki'd to a showbiz wiki, if someone has one. --SunStar Net^talk 11:26, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Relevant parts of the article in question could be merged into Richard Green, provided that the latter article meets the criteria for notability. My main concern is that the only reason for notability regarding Katie Greenwood seems to be a possible future sexual encounter (see [1]). The question is: does that meet the guideline (Wikipedia:Notability (people))? --Oden 14:08, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Fabhcún 20:05, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, unless sourced soon. Seems like this could be notable, but WP:BLP does apply, and there is nothing cited with a reliable source (I don't think www.howardstern.com counts, as I'm not certain what fact-checking goes on there.). If no reliable sources have picked this up, then we have our answer regarding notability as well. - Aagtbdfoua 21:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge - with Richard Green and source. Not notable enough for a whole own article but merged together with the Green article and with some reliable sources it would pass the notability guidelines. Of course, if no reliable sources can be found, then just delete the article. Jayden54 22:09, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Being the former girlfriend of a pro athlete and being on Howard Stern is not enough, especially without any verification from reliable sources to pass the notability guidelines for people. Further, considering the content, we must remain mindful of our policy for biographies for living people.-- danntm ^T _C 03:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge - with Richard Green per Jayden54. Certainly interesting but not notable by itself --Kevin Murray 06:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Threesomes don't make a person notable. -/- Warren 10:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Green was a very minor cricketer, who never really made it as a professional. Nathanian 20:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
• Dare I say keep? Hedge that with whether we get some better sources than one Howard Stern mention, but it seems like she'd easily reach WP:BIO. --badlydrawnjeff talk 01:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Richard Green stand alone article fails WP:V, WP:RS, a ménage à trois per se does not confer notability nor does being the girlfriend of an athlete do so.--Dakota 05:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. CRGreathouse (t | c) 09:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep The event was widely publicised across the globe at the time. I've added a couple more sources to the article and am in the process of looking for more. Hiyahiyahiya 00:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Richard Green per Jayden54. This article is solely about the threesome, which seems notable enough given the cited sources, but there is very little biographical information here. -SpuriousQ 00:16, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to Richard Green (cricketer) or weak Keep. Found another media article: [2] —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-12-30 05:13Z
• Merge as above; this suffers from V & RS on its own, but would fit well into the 'parent' article. SkierRMH 05:26, 31 December 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.