Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raven Magwood
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. - Mailer Diablo 02:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Raven Magwood
This is a disputed prod. The issue is of notability. My opinion is that this article is better sourced than most articles of this type, but I'm not sure the threshhold has been reached yet. This is a procedural nomination. UsaSatsui 16:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:N. STORMTRACKER 94 17:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep The article is well-written and well-sourced, and meets WP:BIO and WP:BLP. NASCAR Fan24(radio me!) 17:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Delete Now that I look at it, I agree with Chase me ladies. NASCAR Fan24(radio me!) 20:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)- Vague delete. As the editor who has PRODed this twice (sorry!), I'm not sure. However, it was created by the subject of the article, so I'm loathe to keep it. Sourced it may be, but it smacks of "I'm a local celebrity, LOVE ME"! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 19:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per Chase me ladies. jonathan (talk — contribs) 21:32, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- I would just like to point out that although the creator of the article is a SPA, there's no evidence they are the subject, and there's no explicit prohibition on making an article about yourself in WP:COI --UsaSatsui 22:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- Trudat. But it really needs to be discouraged; and any attempts at a slight re-write result in the article being reverted (in my experience, but then I am not a very friendly editor when it comes to any sort of vanity article!) Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 01:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- I would just like to point out that although the creator of the article is a SPA, there's no evidence they are the subject, and there's no explicit prohibition on making an article about yourself in WP:COI --UsaSatsui 22:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per WP:CSD A7.--Voxpuppet (talk • contribs) 02:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Article asserts notability. Not an speedy canditate. --UsaSatsui 18:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Um, did you guys see the two articles about her? Yeah that gives her notability. If she was the one who created the article, (how do you know this by the way? The creating user's user and talk pages are both redlinked) then remind her of WP:AUTO and remove any COI. She's notable. i said 03:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aarktica 09:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per Chase. Borderline speedy delete with an almost-certain WP:COI issue thrown in for favour. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Quote from WP:N "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." This is not reached for this article. Neozoon 22:14, 14 October 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.
