Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Rachel Marsden
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 procedural close Debate was moved to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Marsden (third nomination) a long time ago already. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 09:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rachel Marsden
Not notable; page is target of frequent, destructive edit warring by people intent on creating attack page and violating poicies regarding biographies of living persons, despite recent arbcom ruling. Stompin' Tom 19:49, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. Marsden is notable, and the so-called "BLP violations" actually concern verifiable material that has been published through several reliable sources. The recent ArbComm ruling does not prevent material critical of Marsden from being included in the article, notwithstanding that certain contributors oppose such inclusion. CJCurrie 19:54, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: This nomination hasn't even been filed properly. It should be listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Marsden (second nominiation). I can't be bothered to fix this myself, but assume someone else will do so shortly. CJCurrie 19:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep Actually, this would be the FOURTH AfD, the last being Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Marsden (third nomination) which ended just last month which ended in "Speedy Keep". Besides, is the subject of multiple non-trivial pieces by reliable sources. Just because a page is frequently vandalized is not a reason to delete an article (Los Angeles, California is vandalized almost every day). And per CJCurrie, no BLP violations are occurring here. Ahh, and I see the nom is a sockpuppet that's been blocked indefinately. --Oakshade 00:08, 1 February 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.
