Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Orient (second nomination)

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. -Doc^g 01:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jane Orient (second nomination)

Jane Orient (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fails WP:BIO. No evidence of non-trivial coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Although she is affiliated with several notable organizations (AAPS, OISM), notability is not inherited and she herself does not meet criteria for her own article. Prior VfD in 2005 here. MastCell ^Talk 18:21, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

• ambivalent - I nominated her the first time; its grown a bit since then. I note that although her page says she contributes to LewRockwell.com, that page doesn't list her as a notable contributor William M. Connolley 18:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, NN as a writer, and being a fig leaf for Stephen Milloy isn't notability. --Dhartung | Talk 09:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
• Comment She seems to be an author with quite a few Google hits. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 15:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: OK, but what about being the subject of independent, reliable secondary sources? Google hits are not a criterion for notability in and of themselves. MastCell ^Talk 16:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable. Just another promoter of dangerous anti-vaccination nonsense. -- Fyslee/talk 21:40, 20 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.