Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joyce Tenneson

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 of the debate was DELETE. — JIP | Talk 07:42, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Joyce Tenneson

Vanity page, copyvio pfctdayelise 14:11, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. Copyvio from here - is it a copyvio if it's your own site? I am listing this on AfD instead of Speedy delete because I don't know if the subject is notable enough to warrant inclusion. - pfctdayelise 14:11, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
• I'm most emphatically not an expert on the field photography, but if she's won numerous awards and been named among the ten most influential female photographers in the history of photography by American Photo Magazine, that sounds like she's notable enough. Google doesn't return all that many hits, but the ones that I do get seem to be relevant enough. Or am I missing something here? Unless I am, I'd say keep and rewrite, because right now it's pretty damn far from a decent encyclopedia article. Hard facts are required. It does feel like a vanity page, but the subject appears to be notable enough nonetheless. (And obviously, if you own the copyright for a piece of text, you can use that in Wikipedia, no problem -- though after that you can only blame yourself if it shows up somewhere else, possibly modified, what with the whole GNU Free Documentation License thing and all.) -- Captain Disdain 16:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete as copyvio as per guideline A8. She is notable enough to have an article in her own right but not a copyvio. The copyvio was from an anonymous address so we don't know if its her or not - it is inappropriate content in either case. Capitalistroadster 00:30, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Fails "commercial content provider" and "48 hours" clauses of CSD A8. Still a copyvio though. Subject is notable, but delete this until such time as someone writes a proper article. Haeleth 00:38, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Dottore So 09:44, 18 October 2005 (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.