Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Felicity Arbuthnot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. - Mailer Diablo 06:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Felicity Arbuthnot

Felicity Arbuthnot (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

She's a freelance journalist - so you can find a bit she's written using google - but really nothing about her. She suggested this - and is a friend of another - but nothing notable unless being an Arburthnot counts in itself. Some unsourced stuff has also been removed (see talk)-Docg 20:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I suggest deletion unless some reasonable notability is shown. (Note: I removed the large quantity of unsourced stuff from the article.) - David Gerard 20:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete She has written a couple of stories which are included as references, but they do not prove notability since she is not the subject. She receives passing reference in a third, and is in someone's family tree. Not quite enough, but more references might turn up to tip the balance. Edison 21:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
The family tree is on a website operated by the creator of this article.--Docg 21:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep - Being a friend of someone who got killed isn't notable, though it got her much-quoted in relation to the Margaret Hassan abduction, which account for about 2/3 of her 75 refs in NewsBank since 1998. Otherwise, mildly prolific journalist on Iraq topics; campaigned re children in Iraq ill allegedly due to depleted uranium use; speaker at various Stop the War Coalition events (understudied for Tony Benn when he couldn't make it to Faringdon Peace Group's Day of Peace in 2005); gets a lot of letters published on Iraq topics, etc. Tearlach 00:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete: per nom Giano 06:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete, some public visibility but no real notability. Writes mainly for non-notable publications. --Dhartung | Talk 09:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete: She's still working, and she might hit the public more forcefully in the future, but, at present, she does not pass the writer standards. Geogre 12:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete after merging the two sentences of intersting information into Margaret Hassan and Reg Keys. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Not seeing her as notable based on the current information that is available. FloNight 15:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delte as per nom. No significant notability. DES (talk) 16:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I do not know if her work is what I would call notable, but there are 2 BBC references to it specifically, and one from the Guardian, and as long as we're going to keep going by the present Wikipedia rules, that's 3 nontrivial RS, and that is notable for WP. Although I rather agree with Tearlach's evaluation of it, it's besides the point. She fits the rules. Is she a good example for why we should change the rules?--that's another matter but this individual AfD with 10 or so people participating is not the place to revolutionize WP. DGG 05:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
This is factually incorrect. There are no biographical references to her at all. There are a couple of rent-a-quotes in articles about other people. That clearly is not enough. Hell, I've been quoted in three newspapers.--Docg 07:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I can find multiple articles in three newspapers in which i was the subject, but I don't think i'm notable enough for an article. DES (talk) 16:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
My point, exactly.--Docg 16:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete visible, but not notable. KrakatoaKatie 08:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Yet more ArbuthNotNotable spam. DewiMorgan 20:22, 18 May 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.