Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caroline Plumb (2nd nomination)

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. Courcelles 02:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caroline Plumb[edit]

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

This BLP has remained virtually orphaned and unreferenced for four and a half years. I can see no solid evidence of notability and can find no strong secondary sources. Scott Mac 21:48, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because unsourced. WP is not a free CV-hosting service. --FormerIP (talk) 21:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Unsourced blowing of the proverbial triumphant trumpet. Yuck. Carrite (talk) 05:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Her activities as a businesswoman /entrepreneur has attracted notice. See [1] and [2] for a couple of examples aside from the Management Today listing already in the article. -- Whpq (talk) 14:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These additional cites do not establish notability. Are we to give an article to eveybody in business who has been mentioned in the press twice? That wouldn't even establish notability for an organisation, let alone an individual. --FormerIP (talk) 15:06, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, given my above statement, it's thrice as there was source in the article. But these are just two examples. There are other examples. [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. -- Whpq (talk) 15:37, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nom and yes she does get the occasional mention in the press but it is far from significant coverage. Sean.hoyland - talk 15:12, 13 August 2010 (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.