Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gillian Eadie

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. --Sam Blanning(talk) 15:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gillian Eadie

  ATTENTION!

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

Non-notable high school principle. Was prodded, but prod was removed by an anon Midnighttonight remind to go do uni work! 20:58, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletions. -- Midnighttonight remind to go do uni work! 21:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Doesn't really seem to have done anything notible. Article feels like it was written by family member or close friend - SimonLyall 21:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - I'm sure she's very nice. Not apparently notable. Principal, incidentally. - Corporal Tunnel 21:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete - Fails WP:BIO. Seems to be a page with a myriad of copyright violations too. --Ineffable3000 22:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable. -Amatulic 22:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable. EVula 22:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Mrs Eadie is a very prestigous Wellingtonian and well known for her work on the use of technology in schools, especially in New Zealand. She deserves to have article on Wikipedia. The school she is currently head of is also one of the most renown private schools in New Zealand. It is also one of the oldest in the country. User:203.97.99.126 (moved from Talk:Gillian Eadie by --Midnighttonight remind to go do uni work! 03:18, 19 October 2006 (UTC) )
  • Keep I was the one who started this article and I am most certainly not a family member or friend! In fact i've never met the person, but really she is quite notable in New zealand educational circles and I don't see a problem with her article . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferraud2 (talk • contribs)
    • Comment If you can explain how Ms. Eadie passes Wikipedia:Notability (people), I'll be happy to reverse my vote. EVula 05:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment She does pass Wikipedia's notability standards as she does have published works and is a recognised professional who has conducted groundbreaking research that is widely recognised by a multitude of educational professionals in New Zealand. She has also won awards for her work. She is also academic.
    • Comment And isn't WP:BIO quite clearly a non-exclusionary list of criteria? --Dom 19:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Notable enough, I'd say, within her field. The copyvios and tone can be worked on, as I've done; although, after removing all the unnecessary cruft about the things that aren't what make her notable, there doesn't seem to be all that much left. Still, better than stubs I've seen, and I think it's a fine addition. --Dom 19:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Attributed and notable within the educational circle. Exir KamalabadiJoin Esperanza! 13:20, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -She appears to be notable enough. I don't see any reason why some personal aspects of the article needed to be removed. Way better than some stubs i've seen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Jockstrap5000 (talk • contribs) .
New user, five contributions all about Gillian Eadie. Suspected sockpuppet. --Midnighttonight remind to go do uni work! 22:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Writing two papers and winning an award for IT excellence in school don't seem to be indications of notability, unless it can be demonstrated in the article those papers or the award are well-known, per the proposed WP:PROF or anything at WP:BIO. Gotyear 03:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Additional comment. What is the widely recognized groundbreaking research she's done? The article mentions her speaking at conferences, winning an award and the titles of two works, but it gives me no context from which to understand or verify the importance of her work. Gotyear 03:54, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, no evidence of notability. Daniel.Bryant 06:43, 23 October 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.