Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Johnstone: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Timberlack (talk | contribs) keep |
Deus et lex (talk | contribs) →Amanda Johnstone: keep |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing|list of Computing-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:CommanderWaterford|CommanderWaterford]] ([[User talk:CommanderWaterford|talk]]) 15:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)</small> |
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing|list of Computing-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:CommanderWaterford|CommanderWaterford]] ([[User talk:CommanderWaterford|talk]]) 15:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)</small> |
||
*'''Keep''' As per available resources subject satisfies [[WP:GNG]]. [[User:Timberlack|Timberlack]] ([[User talk:Timberlack|talk]]) 07:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' As per available resources subject satisfies [[WP:GNG]]. [[User:Timberlack|Timberlack]] ([[User talk:Timberlack|talk]]) 07:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' - article could do with a cleanup to rid itself of promotional language, but seems there is clearly significant coverage by independent sources to meet [[WP:BIO]]. [[User:Deus et lex|Deus et lex]] ([[User talk:Deus et lex|talk]]) 08:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 08:21, 16 February 2021
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Amanda Johnstone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Amanda Johnstone is not notable. Also almost the entire article was created by Amanda Johnstone herself, and thus is heavily bias and made to her to look good. JJK2000 (talk) 14:53, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep as per sufficient independent media coverage: TIME, CEO, IrishNews, France24 etc. pp. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:25, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychiatry-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep As per available resources subject satisfies WP:GNG. Timberlack (talk) 07:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - article could do with a cleanup to rid itself of promotional language, but seems there is clearly significant coverage by independent sources to meet WP:BIO. Deus et lex (talk) 08:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)