Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Shuppy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was delete. · Katefan0(scribble) 18:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Annie Shuppy
Being managing editor of a student newspaper does not equal notability. --fvw* 23:01, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, nn --Rschen7754 23:17, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as per nominator. Lord Bob 23:18, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, probably speedy. I consider this a nn-bio, but I've not tagged it as such. Friday (talk) 14:59, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, borderline-speedy. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:51, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Lack of "notability" is not a criterion for deletion. -- Reinyday, 13:53, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
- Please don't make casual, inaccurate statements about policy. 1) The page you cite is not policy, nor is Wikipedia:Importance. 2) For biographies, it is; or, phrasing this carefully, notability is a Guideline for inclusion of biographies. 3) Lack of notability is, in fact, a de facto criterion and always has been. Because there is no consensus on this, there is no general policy on this, so it is decided case-by-case.
4) Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information is policy, and non-notable biographies are perfect examples of information which is true but is not encyclopedic.Dpbsmith (talk) 14:56, 23 September 2005 (UTC)- You're taking Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information out of context. This article does not come under any point in the policy. I think it should be deleted anyway, but you shouldn't misuse policy like that. ··gracefool |☺ 17:17, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- Please don't make casual, inaccurate statements about policy. 1) The page you cite is not policy, nor is Wikipedia:Importance. 2) For biographies, it is; or, phrasing this carefully, notability is a Guideline for inclusion of biographies. 3) Lack of notability is, in fact, a de facto criterion and always has been. Because there is no consensus on this, there is no general policy on this, so it is decided case-by-case.
- 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
