Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg kendall-ball

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 05:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greg kendall-ball

Greg kendall-ball (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Subject of article does not meet guidelines for notability per WP:BIO. Nv8200p talk 02:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete this is a borderline speedy case. Might as well let the AfD run its course or snowball it if no one asserts notability. --Daniel J. Leivick 02:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, could easily be speedy. Asserts that subject is "well known" in the blogosphere but then, in the same sentence, notes that he has only 99 readers subscribed, which is blatant sillyness. --N Shar 02:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable blogger --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 03:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Obviously nonnotable. YechielMan 04:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Yeah, my blog has readers too. So what? Non-notable as far as I can see. --Pigman^talk 05:21, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:BIO and WP:NOT - Wikipedia is not a Kendall Ball. SubSeven 10:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Delete fails WP:BIO •CHILLDOUBT• 11:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy delete for no assertion of notability. (I think 99 people subscribing to a blog feed is not an assertion of notability.) Sam Blacketer 21:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete no assertion of notability. Jefferson Anderson 21:51, 13 February 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.