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. RL0919 (talk) 20:34, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kristin Adams (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSINGER, PROD removed. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:41, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: neither the nominator, nor anyone else, have provided assurances that a reasonable search has been made for additional sources per WP:BEFORE
I'm willing to change my vote to delete if assurances are provided that those searches were made Jack4576 (talk) 08:06, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Invalid justification. Timothytyy (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's a valid procedural objection. This nominator has nominated at least a dozen pages all with similarly vague rationales and provided no evidence that they've followed BEFORE. The nominator has not responded to concerns raised in ongoing discussions. Many, if not most, of the nominations are already heading towards keep. This increasingly looks like a disruptive mass nomination. pburka (talk) 22:34, 14 May 2023 (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.