Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Umenwoke

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 01:31, Feb 2, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Umenwoke

About a surname. -- Hoary 09:12, 2005 Jan 27 (UTC)

• Vanity, about the creator's surname. Delete. Mgm|^(talk) 11:22, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable enough, family vanity. Megan1967 02:18, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Mikkalai 08:09, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. Though it was I who nominated this for VfD, you'll notice that I didn't add '''delete'''. I didn't and don't have any strong desire to see it deleted; I merely listed it here as it's my understanding that surnames usually don't get articles. I'm not qualified to judge the notability of this particular surname, and I'm suspicious about the word "popular", but otherwise I find the article informative and suspect that it's worthwhile. Certainly some surnames should and do get articles: see Kim (Korean name). Unfortunately the latter article doesn't tell me what I want to know: why such an enormous percentage of Koreans have this surname -- however, if I wanted to look this up (in English rather than in Korean, which unfortunately I can't read), Wikipedia is where I'd look for it. Meanwhile, Wikipedia welcomes seemingly endless articles about characters in or features of, say, this or that US TV scifi series (attempts at VfD are resisted indignantly), whereas I'd have thought that anyone interested in that material to that degree would find and use the relevant fansite. -- Hoary 09:33, 2005 Jan 28 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.