Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicole Rogerson

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 keep. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Rogerson[edit]

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

fails WP:BIO. I could only find 7 mentions of her in the media in the last 10 years. that is not enough indepth coverage to justify notability. [1]. and simply being the founder of an organisation with zero coverage does not make her notable [2].LibStar (talk) 00:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. _{-- Eastmain (talk) 16:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC)}[reply]
Keep. The article has multiple references, which is enough to demonstrate notability. Counting Google hits is not the best way to determine notability. -- Eastmain (talk) 16:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I used Google news which is far more reliable than google. I really don't think 7 mentions of her in the media in the last 10 years meets the bar for WP:BIO. feel free to prove me wrong with evidence of substantial coverage. LibStar (talk) 15:53, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notability established by substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:02, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

4 sources is not significant coverage. All I could find 7 mentions of her in the media in the last 10 years. LibStar (talk) 07:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, going to have to disagree with LibStar here; two separate sources in major Australian newspapers, and one from the national broadcaster, are easily enough to meet WP:BIO in my view. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Delete the references in the article are about the cause Ms Rogerson is involved with, and not about her. As such, they don't come close to satisfying WP:BIO. For instance, none of them give her date of birth, information about her schooling, career prior to her current role, any other significant achievements, family, etc. Nick-D (talk) 09:48, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Sure, the references mention her in connection with her cause; she is notable for co-founding The Lizard Children's Centre, not for being born in 1964. That being said, there should be sources for the statements regarding her personal information. Favonian (talk) 11:40, 9 November 2009 (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.