Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alison Wheeler

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. —Xezbeth 13:22, May 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Alison Wheeler

Blatant vanity. This woman is of no importance or interest and really shouldn't be on wikipedia 163.1.239.33 10:24, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

  • and this is said by an IP address editor? Do Oxford University know you are posting this? Plenty of links in and out so far as I can see, and doesn't meet the charge of 'vanity' as not written by the subject of the article. --Vamp:Willow 11:00, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Established political person. Be careful about your tone Willow. It sounded a bit agressive. Mgm|(talk) 12:23, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
sorry ... a case of seeing a VfD posted by an IP address that has apparently done nothing previous to asking for a deletion makes one suspect the motives (ie a personal attack during an election campaign?) --Vamp:Willow 13:24, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Current subject is marginal, reads like a CV. Could probably be rewritten into an article about the Beautiful South singer of the same name. I'll work on it if nobody else wants to. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:17, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete She simply isn't prominent enough. Google search for "Alison Wheeler" + Delga gets 33 hits, 20 of them from Wikipedia or mirrors, and 4 from her personal website. Dsmdgold 15:22, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, major(ish) party candidate for national parliament. Kappa 20:31, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC) Oops I think I misread something. Kappa 21:24, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep also widely-known LGBT activist --Vamp:Willow 21:14, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • If she's a candidate for Parliament from the Lib Dems, keep, but this fact is not indicated in the article. Meelar (talk) 21:16, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
    • My mistake, she does not appear to be a parliamentary candidate. Kappa 21:24, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep, parliamentary candidate or not. Good Wikipedians like creator Jdforrester and subsequent editors VampWillow and Bearcat do not write up "blatant vanity" articles. Samaritan 23:10, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Why thank you. I'm a "good Wikipedian" now? Gosh. James F. (talk) 15:58, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • keep. She's on the LibDem's English Council. Not my party, in case you were wondering. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:15, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable LGBT activist. Looking at the history page I dont think it was vanity. Megan1967 03:55, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Blatantly not a vanity article. ed g2s • talk 16:42, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, err, obviously. ;-) James F. (talk) 15:58, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep for the article. Strong delete the troll who nominated this. - Lucky 6.9 07:40, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.