Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melissa Hopkins

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. Flower party☀ 01:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Melissa Hopkins[edit]

Tagged for CSD-A7 speedy deletion, but article asserts notability so sent here instead. Note: technical nomination - no vote from me. ➨ ≡Я Ξ DVΞRS≡ 14:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google does not show her prominently. Article reads like vanity, or maximally like a CV straight off a promotional website. No verifiable references supplied. Cannot rule out hoax (interviewing senators would have left a larger footprint on Google). JFW | T@lk 21:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I found this but it still doesn't really outline any level of notability. IrishGuy 22:35, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete exists per this but not worthy of article. —porg es_(talk) 22:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete very quickly, and please note that I was the one who tagged this for speedy deletion. Melissa wrote this herself in the third person. I disagree with Redvers that this article "asserts notability." e.g. "She was the first female cast member of Days of Our Lives" would be notable, "She was on Days of Our Lives" does not make her notable. "She caused a scandal when she blackmailed her candidate's opponent in the 2000 Senate elections" is notable, "She worked in the 2000 Senate elections" is not. &c &c. Also please note that many people have IMDB pages, including me, but this doesn't make them notable either. - Abscissa 23:24, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE vanity Argyrios 03:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Vanity and nn. DarthVad e r 06:36, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable. The JPS ^{talk to me} 13:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn, vanity. --Srik e it^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 00:55, 3 May 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.