Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christine Fitzgerald

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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 04:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christine Fitzgerald[edit]

Non-notable Dianacruft. PROD tag removed by anon. :sigh: FCYTravis 03:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete its actually much closer to being crankcruft, but either way its nn. JoshuaZ 03:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn. --KimvdLinde 04:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per JoshuaZ, though the theory that the Windsors are shape-shifting reptiles is amusing. Fan1967 04:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Mussssst keep Charlssss ssssecretsss. 04:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Bizarre. When I added that, I used the ~'s macro, and it just included the date rather than my name. Wasn't trying to be anon... Georgewilliamherbert 20:29, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- BJAODN on these grounds. Daniel Case 14:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not seem to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People still alive. Schizombie 04:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, don't want to tip off the were-iguanas. Kuru ^talk 05:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nn minor character, though David Icke's The Biggest Secret sounds like a fun read. — ApolloCreed ^{(comment) (talk)} 05:43, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to David Icke. -- Vary | Talk 05:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with David Icke. There isn't enough information in this article to warrant a page to itself. (aeropagitica) 07:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nn (http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Christine%20Fitzgerald%22%20%22princess%20diana%22&sourceid=mozilla2&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 a Google search on "Christine Fitzgerald" and "Princess Diana"] gets only 134 Google hits) and potentially libelous. --Aaron 07:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- hearsay of hearsay -- Simon Cursitor 12:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nn. --Ter e nc e Ong 14:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable to even merit a mention in David Icke MLA 14:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nonsense--Porturology 16:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. *drew 08:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Crankcruft. -- Krash (Talk) 16:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: uncontroversial deletions like this one are good candidates for the Wikipedia:Proposed deletion process currently being tested out. Consider using that simpler process for the next similar nomination. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 02:51, 5 March 2006 (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.