Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debra Peterson: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 23:45, 3 May 2022

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. Stifle (talk) 09:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Debra Peterson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

After four years a two line uncited stub. Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG,nothing in the text that shows any Wikipedia:Notability (people) Off2riorob (talk) 20:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment At the time of the article's creation, subject was notable. However, the guideline has changed since then: simply being a "Playboy Playmate" no longer means that notability is guaranteed. A question here is whether this article can be kept per some kind of "grandfather clause". Still, I would say that this is probably a delete because it's an unreferenced BLP and I can't see notability under the new criteria. Gosox⁽⁵⁵⁾₍₅₅₎ 21:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:PORNBIO. Epbr123 (talk) 11:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Unreferenced BLP article of a person who fails GNG & PORNBIO. EuroPride (talk) 18:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per my comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gillian Bonner and elsewhere--Milowent (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unreferenced blp. Hipocrite (talk) 15:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:ENT, no indication the subject can satisfy the GNG. Extremely minor role listed in imdb is apparently unrelated person with similar name. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the consensus at the RfC was pretty clear that this distinction is not suitable for inclusion within itself, and the RfC was widely advertised with much more participation than at these AfD debates. Because of this sourcing requirement no subjects get automatic inclusion or "inherited notability", which is basically the argument that some editors are making above. I haven't found the level of coverage necessary to meet the GNG. Them From Space 21:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this page.''
+<!--Template:Afd top
+Note:  If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]].  When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
+The result was    '''delete'''. [[User:Stifle|Stifle]] ([[User talk:Stifle|talk]]) 09:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 ===[[Debra Peterson]]===
-{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}}
 :{{la|Debra Peterson}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debra Peterson|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2010 April 21#{{anchorencode:Debra Peterson}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd={{urlencode:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debra Peterson}}|2=AfD statistics}})
@@ Line 7: / Line 13: @@
 *'''Comment''' At the time of the article's creation, subject was notable.  However, the guideline has changed since then: simply being a "Playboy Playmate" no longer means that notability is guaranteed.  A question here is whether this article can be kept per some kind of "grandfather clause".  Still, I would say that this is probably a '''delete''' because it's an unreferenced BLP and I can't see notability under the new criteria. [[User:Gosox5555|Gosox]]<sup>([[User_talk:Gosox5555|55]])</sup><sub>([[Special:Contributions/Gosox5555|55]])</sub> 21:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' Fails WP:GNG and WP:PORNBIO. [[User:Epbr123|Epbr123]] ([[User talk:Epbr123|talk]]) 11:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
+* <span style="font-size: 85%;">Note: This debate has been added to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography|WikiProject Pornography]] [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Pornography/Deletion|list of deletions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 17:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)</span>
+*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/People|list of People-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 17:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)</small>
+*'''Delete''' - Unreferenced BLP article of a person who fails GNG & PORNBIO. [[User:EuroPride|EuroPride]] ([[User talk:EuroPride|talk]]) 18:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
+*'''Keep''' per my comment at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gillian Bonner]] and elsewhere--[[User:Milowent|Milowent]] ([[User talk:Milowent|talk]]) 22:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' unreferenced blp. [[User:Hipocrite|Hipocrite]] ([[User talk:Hipocrite|talk]]) 15:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
+*'''Delete'''. Fails WP:ENT, no indication the subject can satisfy the GNG. Extremely minor role listed in imdb is apparently unrelated person with similar name. [[User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|Hullaballoo Wolfowitz]] ([[User talk:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|talk]]) 16:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' the consensus at the RfC was pretty clear that this distinction is not suitable for inclusion within itself, and the RfC was widely advertised with much more participation than at these AfD debates. Because of this sourcing requirement no subjects get automatic inclusion or "inherited notability", which is basically the argument that some editors are making above. I haven't found the level of coverage necessary to meet the GNG. '''[[User:Themfromspace|<span style="color:blue;">Them</span>]][[User talk:Themfromspace|<span style="color:red;">From</span>]][[Special:Contributions/themfromspace|<span style="color:black;">Space</span>]]''' 21:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>