Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paula Begoun
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. John254 22:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Paula Begoun[edit]
- Paula Begoun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This article had an expired prod on it, with the reason: "Almost an A7 - promotional bio." Maybe it's on the adverty side but I'm not sure it should be deleted, since she is a notable personality, so I'm bringing it here for further opinions. ... discospinster talk 02:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. If anything that directly promotes any of her books - then it should be deleted. Fattyjwoods (Push my button) 03:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - seems to pass the notability test. If it's too promotional, it should be cleaned up, not deleted. Terraxos (talk) 03:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. It should have more sources, but it has enough for WP:BIO. --Dhartung | Talk 04:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why was this nominated? If the you think it should be kept, then remove the prod tag and leave it be. You only bring things here if you think they should be deleted, and the nominator obviously does not. I prodded it, but given the keep opinions it will have to stay for now.--Docg 08:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2008 (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.