Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monica Hannan

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 NO CONSENSUS. The closing remark by the nominator suggests this should be worked out elsewhere, and that deletion was never his actual intention. -Splash - tk 15:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monica Hannan

I don't feel that a news director of a small television station is inherently notable. I have tried to clean this article up, but I still don't feel that Hannan is notable or worthy of an article. MatthewUND^(talk) 07:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Looks fine to me. Dalejenkins 08:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:BIO. Otto4711 13:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no significant evidence of notability cited. DES ^(talk) 22:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails WP:BIO, news anchors, unless nationally known, are generally not notable enough. -Hornandsoccer ^Talk 02:23, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - WP has plenty of articles on smaller-market media personalities. Hannan should not be an exception. --AlexWCovington (talk) 04:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I hate to pick on my friend Alex, but where are all of these articles for local news personalities? There are plenty of articles for journalists who work on a national scale, but am I missing a category for local journalists? I have come across a few local news personality articles in the past and they have often seemed like vanity pieces. --MatthewUND^(talk) 05:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Peruse Category:American journalists and see how many stack up to the news director of a 4-station television network. -AlexWCovington (talk) 05:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument at AfD. If you think there are other articles that may not meet our policies and guidelines, you can nominate them for discussion separately, but here and now, we're discussing this article. See also WP:INN. Xtifr _tälk 22:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete sources are not independent nor reliable. Ohconfucius 10:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Hannan is bismark`s no.1 anchorwoman and is known city wide — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.104.138.189 (talk • contribs)

Question What do you bean by a small television station — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.104.138.189 (talk • contribs)

- Comment - Well said, except I would go even further to say that she is known through much of Western ND, as her newscasts reach that area both on radio and on television. Weatherman90 02:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ she is a writer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.104.138.189 (talk • contribs)
~~Keep~~ She is one of north dakotas major broadcasters — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.104.138.189 (talk • contribs)

Check WP:BIO Again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.104.138.189 (talk • contribs)

Comment: In a remarkable display of being bold, 70.104.138.189 had actually edited WP:BIO to support his argument in this AfD. You can see the edit here. This was quickly reverted by User:Radiant!, who, like me, is not a participant in this debate (yet), and therefore has no particular axe to grind. Although Radiant merely called the edit "redundant", I think it also conflicted, mildly, with WP:LOCAL, which is another guideline that might be worth considering in this particular debate. This person may or may not be sufficiently notable, but the television station where she anchors almost certainly is, and so a merge per WP:LOCAL is an option worth considering. (I still have no stated opinion in this debate.) Xtifr _tälk 10:32, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, WP:LOCAL has been marked historical since last I looked at it. But while the specific points it addresses may not have reached consensus, the underlying notion about mergers are widely used throughout Wikipedia, and they are what I had mind. Xtifr _tälk 10:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems to meet all necessary criteria for a stub. Kukini ^{hablame aqui} 01:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - She is a television anchor who covers all of western North Dakota. That is a lot of reach. Weatherman90 02:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I feel that a little clarification is in order. As a member of WikiProject North Dakota, I am very much in favor of having a robust level of North Dakota-related content on Wikipedia. The reason why I nominated this article for deletion was because I wasn't sure that this individual was notable enough to warrant her own individual article. I would be happy to see the content of the article merged into the NBC North Dakota article. If we did that, we could turn Monica Hannan into a redirect to the NBC North Dakota article. We could add a section to the NBC North Dakota article with the info about Hannan and other anchors from the station. I would actually think it would be a great idea to include brief information about anchors on other North Dakota tv station articles as well. I'm certainly not opposed to having that kind of information on Wikipedia. My only reason for nominating the article was because I didn't feel that this one anchor was any more unqiue than other anchors and that she really didn't deserve her own article. I would like to see this material merged with the NBC North Dakota article. I think that would make sense. In hindsight, I perhaps should have done the merging myself and turned Monica Hannan into a redirect myself instead of nominating this article for deletion. --MatthewUND^(talk) 04:39, 7 April 2007 (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.