Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelly Curnalia

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. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Curnalia

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

Contested PROD (PROD removed by IP without comment). Insufficient grounds for notability given in the article. References do not demonstrate notability; Some do not even mention her. Nothing much in Google News, Books or Scholar either. Seems promotional. DanielRigal (talk) 10:03, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 14:10, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability in the article. No coverage in reliable secondary sources. Article contains unsourced personal information. Google turned up very little. CodeTheorist (talk) 22:11, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete I had tagged this under WP:CSD#A7 when I first saw it. This biography basically says that Ms. Curnalia is a person who went to college, got a degree, set up a private practice and did some volunteer work. Although sourced with citations, they are trivial citations, documenting a non-notable life. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Person is not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.164.5 (talk) 15:32, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree. There doesn't seem to be anything in google that indicates this is a notable person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.228.217.149 (talk) 15:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Speedy Delete This is clearly a non-notable person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.164.5 (talk) 15:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Speedy Delete When breaking down what was on there originally and what can actually be substantiated, there is clear evidence of non-notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eggsheads (talk • contribs)

*Speedy Delete Wikidan is correct non-notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.164.5 (talk) 16:03, 21 July 2012 (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.