Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Ross (businesswoman)

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 no consensus. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jane Ross (businesswoman)

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

Fine contributions to be sure, but almost entirely local in nature. Article is basically a reworking of the article used as the sole reference. No other sources provided to show that WP:BIO is met. DarkAudit (talk) 20:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment Borderline notability, but she seems to have had statewide name recognition. It might be better to rework this into an article on the Ross Foundation, which seems likely to pass WP:ORG. --Dhartung | Talk 22:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment The article has been reworked into a much better condition, but notability is still almost entirely local. DarkAudit (talk) 06:44, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete local philanthropist on a small scale. No significant public office. DGG (talk) 15:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete I'll admit I submitted the article, having came across her while researching Clark County, Arkansas. However, notable is notable. There are many notable persons who, outside of their little part of the world, are little if at all known. However, where they are known, they made an impact. If the purpose of wikipedia is to inform the readers, and if even one of those readers anywhere in the world just for whatever reason happens to research "Jane Ross", then the article has served the purpose for which wikipedia stands. That is my opinion. Charliecow7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) Charliecow7 (talk • contribs) 12:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:35, 6 February 2008 (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.