Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shannon Perrine

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. --Core desat 04:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shannon Perrine[edit]

I'm not satisfied that the subject meets Wikipedia:Notability. The article does make two claims of notability; namely, that Perrine is "part of the team" that helped her station win some awards. However, without knowing her precise involvement, it's not possible to say whether her role was at all notable. Apart from the awards, there's no evidence that she's the subject of multiple, independent published works. Finally, this article was created and authored entirely by a WP:SPA who is likely Perrine herself (see Image:Final Perrine Shannon .jpg for the admission) which leads one to suspect WP:COI issues. —Psychonaut 16:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as it does assert notability, and she appears to be notable, although a fan (relative by affinity?) seems to be editing the article. However, all WP:POV and WP:COI statements must be removed ASAP. See also at WP:COIN for further discussion. Bearian 18:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- "Assertions of notability" are not grounds for keeping, merely for not speedy deleting. Corvus cornix 21:40, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, you are correct! Bearian 21:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no evidence of notability. JJL 18:39, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable per WP:BIO. Videmus Omnia 22:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete it asserts notability clearly enough, but as Corvus says, that's just the condition for avoiding speedy, not for keeping the article. Her role at WTEA may possibly have been significant for the award, since she was an anchor at the time. (Amid all the irrelevant stuff abut her ancestors, the article does not mention the actual award--from the Murrow web site [1] , it was the 2004 National award for Continuing Coverage,TV large market: WTAE-TV, Pittsburgh: "Hepatitis Outbreak.")
Weak KEEP Wikipedia should be inclusive not exclusive. I am a firm believer that most bios should be allowed to remain. All bios need is sources and a minimal standard of notability. The larger Wikipedia is the best of a resource it is. One million articles is much better that one hundred thousand articles. It should be a source of information on the most trivial matters to the most important. Callelinea 04:30, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please discuss the merits of this article. Corvus cornix 04:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Even her article on WTEA's site doesn't assert any notability. Clarityfiend 16:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete local talking heads are rarely notable, she's no exception. Carlossuarez46 18:28, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am the author of this article, and I am not Ms. Perrine. I am not a fan or relative either. This article is simply my first foray into wikipedia authorship. I gathered the information by corresponding with Ms. Perrine, and I also got the picture from her. If I have mischaracterized the ownership of the picture, I am happy to correct that. As for meeting Wikipedia:Notability, I am trying to assemble that additional information at this time. Gmanhoobie 12:07, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 01:18, 30 June 2007 (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.