Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mika Edwards

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 — Caknuck (talk) 19:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Mika Edwards

Mika Edwards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Fails WP:BIO. Please read the article and references carefully. The "award" that she wasn't given to her, it was given to the whole entire newspaper staff. In addition, this "award" was given by the New York Times to a newspaper owned by the New York Times - hardly a notable award. The references only link to articles that she has written. Every journalist has articles somewhere on the web. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 05:37, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Eminently non-notable. -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 05:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Comment -- This article was {{prod}}ed on 21 December 2007 -- on the grounds that it was a "hoax".
  • After spending thirty seconds doing a web search I could see the article clearly wasn't a "hoax".
  • As an experiment, I found some references, and added them, so the article wasn't unreferenced.
  • My conclusions were: (1) that the original article about her definitely not a hoax, and the quality-control patroller who {{prod}}ed it as a "hoax" was alarmingly hasty and really owes it to the rest of us to show more caution in future; (2) the noteworthiness of the young journalist in question remains marginal.
  • Nominator didn't mention in the nomination that Edwards appeared twice on Court TV WRT her coverage of a serial killer. Court TV is a USA-wide network isn't it? I don't get Court TV where I live. I can't form a reliable idea of how noteworthy those appearances would have been.
  • I am not prepared to defend this article, but I don't think I owe any apology for making the effort to expand its references. If the article is deleted I won't regard those efforts as wasted as I pasted the references I found into related articles that were poorly referenced.
  • Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 15:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete as per User:Librarianofages docboat (talk) 16:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, no evidence of notability. Terraxos (talk) 03:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

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.