Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veronica Dillon

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. RL0919 (talk) 21:41, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Veronica Dillon[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Wikipedia is not a Linkedin of business executives, it very clearly fails to establish what she is notable. If you are SVP of a company, it doesn't makes you notable, lacks WP:RS, fails WP:GNG. Meeanaya (talk) 21:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Meeanaya (talk) 21:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Meeanaya (talk) 21:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Below the threshold. Hyperbolick (talk) 22:18, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:01, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:03, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - while not all corporate executives are important, she is the head lawyer for one of the major media outlets, and is often involved in major libel issues, of which she appears to be an expert. She's presented for PLI, a major source of CLE's for lawyers. A search reveals lots of potential sources. Bearian (talk) 22:59, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:37, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 19:22, 29 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and WP:NOTLINKEDIN. Subject not even included in The Washington Post, her employer and main claim to fame. Other senior VPs at the company don't have or need encyclopedia articles. StonyBrook (talk) 03:11, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 11:56, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to validate her as being notable. scope_creep^Talk 12:00, 5 November 2019 (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.