Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dian Grueneich
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 per WP:SNOW. - Mgm|(talk) 01:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dian Grueneich[edit]
- Dian Grueneich (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Fails WP:BIO. ScienceApologist (talk) 02:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete/Merge The California Public Utilities Commission appears to be a significant regulatory body, with members getting proportionate press coverage [1]. However, the coverage appears entirely to be within the context of the commission's duties. I suspect that while the commission is definitely notable, members may not. RayAYang (talk) 04:11, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- RayAYang (talk) 04:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- RayAYang (talk) 04:12, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Several hundred sources on google News Archive. [2]. At least the first 4 clearly mainly about her. Of course the coverage about her will be mainly because of her position--that is why she's notable. The same is true of cabinet secretaries and senators and all other people in politics--and similarly in other fields. Why are these nominations being done without even checking the most obvious and easy to find sources.DGG (talk) 04:36, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, agree with DGG. Johnfos (talk) 04:50, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Notability does not appear to be in question. Ecoleetage (talk) 06:45, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - she is notable independently of her work, which is also notable. - Richard Cavell (talk) 09:52, 15 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.