Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacy denney

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. MBisanz ^talk 03:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stacy denney

I just declined a speedy on this.

She may indeed be notable, but the claims need to be expressed better, with verification and I would like the reassurance of the scrutiny of an AfD. Dweller (talk) 13:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Has enough coverage to establish Notability as shown here [1]. Rewrite warranted, yes - Prod tag warranted affirmative! Bring to Afd No. ShoesssS ^Talk 13:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above argument. The person seems notable according to WP:N, but reliable sources are missing from the article. I put a tag in it to alert others to that fact. Also, the article should be moved to Stacey Denney.--Boffob (talk) 14:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable entrepreneur with a non-notable book and some superficial, non-substantial media coverage. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:50, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:51, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. What Orange Mike said. If everyone who has published a book is considered Notable then we're gonna need way bigger servers! This is a clear puff for the article subject :-) Twilight1701 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Delete, basically per Orange Mike. There is little independent coverage of the subject or of her books. The googlenews results[2] cited by Shoessss give only 9 hits that do not contain sufficiently significant coverage. Not enough here to pass WP:BIO. Nsk92 (talk) 03:11, 13 November 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.