![]() |
The result was delete. — Scott • talk
WP:NFT game DMacks (talk) 23:57, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Scott • talk 10:30, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable unreleased video game. Appears to be an indie mod to the official World of Cars Online game produced by Pixar Studios. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 21:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Theopolisme (talk) 00:31, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No indication of notability, no reliable sources. The only Google Books hit is a diploma thesis that mentions the concept in one paragraph. Huon (talk) 21:19, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Huon, I am aware that in your context, the concept of Procurement PunchOut may not seem to have notability. The reality is that within the procurement market (which makes up a large percentage of the business to business market) it is a very relevant aspect in eCommerce, which has become the status quo in commerce. Due to the fact that it is very niche, widely circulated sources are not readily available. That said, the ones I have used are in fact reliable, and I am continuing to look for more and better sources. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Mbenny101 (talk) 01:11, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. J04n(talk page) 22:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable by WP:DIPLOMAT ("Diplomats who have participated in a significant way in events of particular diplomatic importance that have been written about in reliable secondary sources.") AFAIK Browne, like most other diplomats, has never been involved in an “event of particular diplomatic importance”.
This particular unreferenced article reads oddly. If the subject was the Canadian High Commissioner to the Commonwealth of Dominica, why did he "present his credentials at the Citadelle of Québec"? Why should he "be styled His Excellency by Canadians . . ." etc. This is not clear to me, but then there are no references . . . . Kleinzach 12:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Scott • talk 10:31, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article is written like a review. It contains no sources and all of the information appears to be original research or taken from the project page on SourceForge. I had initially reviewed this article when it was created. At the time, I had noted a few issues on its talk page that I felt needed addressed primarily of which was proving that the topic is notable.
After 3 years, a Google search still turns up almost nothing on the project beyond this Wikipedia page and its page on Sourceforge. I am fairly sure that it does not meet the notability requirements. I am also suspicious that the article was created by one of the core developers who might have a Conflict of interest. Zell Faze (talk) 20:16, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. J04n(talk page) 23:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:((subst:spa|username)) ; suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)) ; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)) . |
Subject fails WP:AUTHOR. A web search brings up little but Facebook links. Competitions and prizes listed in the article are non notable. Safiel (talk) 19:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) JayJayWhat did I do? 02:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable name in a register. No evidence of existence. Le Cheffre (talk) 18:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Scott • talk 10:32, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable musical release. No evidence of full-length professional reviews, charting or awards. Completely unreferenced. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Scott • talk 10:33, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Page looks like it was previously prodded for not having any references. The sources now do not meet WP:RS and there is no significant coverage of the topic. There are some passing mentions but nothing that goes into any depth about him. Looks like the article could still be "under construction," but this could have been addressed during the prod so I am taking it here for discussion. FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 18:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am also nominating the following related pages because it essentially duplicates the above with no added value:
The result was delete. — Scott • talk 10:35, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no team yet. An expansion franchise hasn't been awarded, and the sources in the article indicate it will be several weeks before an announcement. Until then, this is all crystal ball, all the time. pbp 18:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Celtic TV. Courcelles 04:03, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As the heading says appears to be more like an advertisement also what need is there of this page on wikipedia? BadSynergy (talk) 18:20, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted per G2 by Deb (talk · contribs). Non-admin closure. —KuyaBriBriTalk 19:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is not encyclopedic content. Tbh, it's hard to exactly tell what it is. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:17, 2 May 2013 (UTC) Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:17, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. — Scott • talk
Not charted, non-notable, possible redirect to Rebecca Black JayJayWhat did I do? 18:14, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. — Scott • talk 10:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not charted, non-notable, possible redirect to Rebecca Black JayJayWhat did I do? 18:14, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to University of Khartoum. Courcelles 04:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't seem to be a particularly notable faculty, and it doesn't have any decent references to show otherwise. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC) Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Scott • talk 10:27, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Does not meet standards for notability. Appears to be notable based on one allegation that was not resolved and several papers that were withdrawn. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
delete: I am a relative newcomer to posting in Wikipedia. Last night I posted un-sourced additions to this entry about a long-time friend to try to create some balance. The additions were removed by the initial author of the article, a writer who uses the pseudonym "nomoskedasticity." I have attempted to learn the rules today. I am a quick study.
The initial author violates Wikipedia's POV policy by highlighting one minor series of events in the subject's life without placing it in context with his overall achievements, which are significant. The overall portrayal of the subject is undeservedly negative. He actually is a pretty good guy.
A simple Google search of Nomoskedasticity's pen name suggests that he/she has a bias, bordering on obsession, with a very strict interpretation of the rules for citing sources. In one posting in a Wikipedia discussion, the author says "Anyone arguing that plagiarism isn't a serious issue for an encyclopedia needs to encounter an army of cluebats. (Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:08, 30 October 2010 (UTC.)" Taken literally, this is an invitation to violence against people who do not share the writer's perspective. This should rebut any inference that the writer has an open mind on his/her interpretation of the topic of plagiarism.
In another post on the Chronicle for Higher Education's site a writer using the name nomoskedasticity exhorts someone to "badger some reporters!" for coverage of a plagiarism allegation so that the news coverage could be the source of a Wikipedia page. ("UMass Plaigarist makes $166k/year" Chronicle, March 15, 2013.) This exhortation basically is an attempt to use a newspaper to "launder" original research so that it could be cited in a subsequent Wikipedia listing.
This makes me question whether nomoskedasticity wasn't the original informant for the Baltimore Sun articles mentioned in the disputed post. If so, he/she would be the original source of material that was run through a newspaper and subsequently cited in Wikipedia. I believe that this stretches Wikipedia's rules against original research.
I always like to use my name when posting opinion. Anonymous web posts are inherently unreliable because the reader cannot vet the biases and experiences of the writer.
Mark Adams, Baltimore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.140.197.73 (talk) 22:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
which could be a passing mention. The abstract of "Hopes of legally selling snowballs melt away before zoning board; 2 who tried to run stands from home are denied" consists of nothing but the headline--one that suggests a likely passing mention of Mr. Neil. The snippet on Google saysThe guilty pleas were accepted by Judge Donald J. Gilmore after pretrial negotiations between Benjamin A. Neil, an assistant state's attorney, and Michael S.
which looks like a passing mention. Some articles mention that he ran for the Baltimore city council. —rybec 03:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]"We need the patience of Job somedays," says Zoning Board Chairman Benjamin A. Neil. It is here that Rosia Morgan, 69, and Timothy McGinnis, 29, found ...
The result was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G3 and WP:CSD#A7 (although I found no evidence the person existed). Bbb23 (talk) 01:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Something not right in this, I think. Things don't seem to add up. Most obviously, the presence of a calf-mauling tiger. As for the rest of it, I don't think notability is shown and I'm not at all sure what the point of it is. Peridon (talk) 17:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was DELETE. Rather obvious candidate for a speedy deletion; the discussion is very quickly coming to the same conclusion. jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Appears to be some kind of original research. PROD was removed by article creator without an explanation. Lugia2453 (talk) 17:21, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was redirect to MacGregor Arctic Expedition. (non-admin closure) czar · · 19:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
per WP:NOTABILITY. boy scout, no. public health officer, no. veteran, no. Arctic explorer, went to Greenland once. A well-meant story about granddad, but belongs somewhere else. Crusoe8181 (talk) 11:56, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) czar · · 19:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This person fails WP:BASIC and WP:AUTHOR. The biggest failing is a lack of substantial coverage in independent sources. JFHJr (㊟) 15:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Courcelles 04:07, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This publication fails WP:NBOOK and WP:GNG. Sources cover the actual events, like this book, but do not cover this book. Note one of the sections is supported by a very short source that actually discusses the movie, a derivative work of zero note. The source doesn't actually cover this work. JFHJr (㊟) 15:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Courcelles 04:07, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Makes assertion of pioneering in computerised tax collecting, but I could not find siginificant coverage, or indeed any secondary sources to verify them. Appears to fail WP:CORP. hmssolent\You rang? ship's log 14:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Although the numbers in this discussion are fairly even, the delete opinions are more policy based, particularly in that WP:GNG and WP:NMODEL have not been met. J04n(talk page) 23:17, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brittany Beede, she is a woman who signed a develoment contract and was sent to a minor promotion. Only one year in the business and she does nothing notable, never debuted in national TV and was released. No Notable HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:33, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Fails to meet the GNG. Feedback ☎ 17:11, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unless appearing in Complex once, the online version of Maxim twice, and having a sextape makes you notable... she ain't notable for her wrestling career.LM2000 (talk) 03:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She WAS featured on TV for FCW. A number of those matches and appearances are on Youtube but most of them can't be found by searching her name or wrestling name but rather by searching for FCW videos from that time period. Wrestling fans who watch those videos and see her should be able to look her up on Wikipedia and find out who she is and more about her. 84.19.165.217 (talk) 16:38, 1 May 2013 (UTC) — 84.19.165.217 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep She's a pro model. She's been published in many notable publications and magazines and has also been on the cover of several. 79.141.172.21 (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2013 (UTC) — 79.141.172.21 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
http://imgbox.com/abogv895 - http://imgbox.com/ace7AqKH - http://imgbox.com/acwAn8ue - 79.141.167.35 (talk) 22:54, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. Courcelles 22:01, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't pass WP:JOURNALIST. Known in association with Writopia Lab, but notability is not inherited. (Also COI issues.) czar · · 17:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Added Rebecca Wallace-Segall's former name, Rebecca Segall, to the page. She wrote for newspapers and magazines for nine years before she founded Writopia, and served as the senior editor of Psychology Today Magazine. The inclusion of her former name may help to verify her career in journalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RebeccaWS (talk • contribs) 18:05, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you -- I thought that my name would appear at the end of the comment since I logged in with my user account. -- Rebecca WS
The result was delete. WP:SNOW J04n(talk page) 12:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are zero reliable sources demonstrating that this is a medically recognised syndrome rather than just the effect of an injury to a specific individual. ukexpat (talk) 13:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep, per criterion 2: "unquestionably vandalism or disruption and nobody unrelated recommends deleting it." I will leave it to admins and/or other users in good standing to warn or sanction the nominator. Non-admin closure. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Total cheer-leading puffery piece about non-notable banker. Article fails standard Neutrality and Notability guidelines. Zachtron (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedy keep, per criterion 2: "unquestionably vandalism or disruption and nobody unrelated recommends deleting it." I will leave it to admins and/or other users in good standing to warn or sanction the nominator. Non-admin closure. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense article promoting non-important historical professor with zero Notability. Article fails Neutrality and references are unreliable. Zachtron (talk) 09:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Scott • talk 10:42, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Inarguably a non-notable sportsman. The cricketer has not played in any World Cups, and I can't find any reliable sources on Google either that could demonstrate anything significant the sportsman has done as a cricketer. I've seen articles about sportspeople with more assertion of significance than this one getting deleted via AfDs, but this shouldn't be counted per WP:WAX. smtchahal(talk) 10:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. — Scott • talk 10:43, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No reliable sources seem to exist that suggest this term is in use, or that the concept is a notable one. This article is based entirely to blogs, and the only sources I can find are self-published. StAnselm (talk) 09:56, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to 38 (City of Sheffield) Signal Regiment. — Scott • talk 10:52, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this fails WP:MILUNIT. Although a squadron in name, it only consists of 4 troops - probably the equiivalent of a company since its commanded by a major? Gbawden (talk) 09:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) czar · · 11:03, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable as an author. Philafrenzy (talk) 07:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was merge to Worldwar series. Duplicated subject. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 02:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No references, not notable, and there is already another page for this series of books. Blelbach (talk) 07:14, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. (non-admin closure) czar · · 11:01, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reason Dhf510 (talk) 06:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC) Not a notable person.[reply]
The result was redirect to List of regional airliners. And, if still needed, continue to merge material from the history as appropriate, per the discussion. Sandstein 07:21, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also nominated:
The list of short-haul aircraft covers the exact same subject as the list of regional airliners while the latter article is better written and higher quality. The list of short haul aircraft does include more older aircraft, although it is by no means complete. However, I think that since the definitions and distinctions of regional, wide-body, etc. aircraft were not really clear during the 1930s and 1940s, it is silly to try to have a list of regional aircraft from before the Korean War. Since the list of short-haul aircraft is basically a redundant, ugly mess, it should be deleted in order to focus on the cleaner list of regional aircraft.Kbog (talk) 04:59, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
AFDs merged.
|
---|
|
The result was keep. Feel free to continue the discussion about renaming or merging on the article's talkpage. J04n(talk page) 16:03, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
nonnotable book, has been reviewed, but no extensive coverage, i couldnt find any. PS we cant call it a trilogy until all 3 are published. this is really an article on the first book. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:42, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Michig (talk) 06:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable individual lacking ghits and Gnews. CSD removed by sock puppet. In addition, article for creation submission refused. See [21]. Should be speedy. reddogsix (talk) 04:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. No consensus to delete, merge can be performed without needing to ask permission. Also, why do all of you have redlinked usernames? Shii (tock) 15:54, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The article above and its related topics are not notable and are not properly cited as such. KyleLandas (talk) 04:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The included articles are:
--KyleLandas (talk) 04:12, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 04:12, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find any reliable third-party coverage on this company. BigPimpinBrah (talk) 19:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The article is important in pointing out a daily running news source in English language in Finland. It has been linked by Helsinki University, Study link Finland, Finnfacts and so on. It is the only independent source in its area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.204.169.184 (talk) 04:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 04:12, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable minor league player who has yet to meet WP:NHOCKEY. Can be recreated when/if he does or otherwise achieves notability. DJSasso (talk) 18:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 04:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable junior player who has yet to meet WP:NHOCKEY. Can be recreated when/if he does or otherwise achieves notability. DJSasso (talk) 18:35, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 04:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet notable per WP:BIO. I cleaned up the worst of the WP:Vanispamcruftisement, and not much of note remains. No significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. Captain Conundrum (talk) 17:00, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus. with no prejudice against speedy renomination (non-admin closure) czar · · 03:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable amateur athelete that fails to meet WP:NHOCKEY. Can be recreated when/if he does or otherwise achieves notability. DJSasso (talk) 17:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was keep. Consensus is clearly to keep, with support for the suggestion that this be rewritten as an article on the M.A.M. group. Michig (talk) 06:23, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No claims of notability. Institution doesn't seem to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign) 12:14, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was speedily deleted pursuant to A7 & G11. Non-admin closure. Safiel (talk) 13:40, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neologism reddogsix (talk) 03:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was no consensus; merge with Scala (programming language) possible. This was not a great discussion, but vox populii est vox dei. Shii (tock) 15:59, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG. Sources offered are all primary. I was unable to find any suitable sources by Googling. It's possible the subject may become notable in the future, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Msnicki (talk) 13:43, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Delete - As far as i can tell this programming language is an offshoot from Scala (programming language). Because it is obviously not yet noteable enough to have its own page it could be merged with the page for Scala which seems to be more built up and is not being disputed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eatmark (talk • contribs) 03:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oluies (talk) 19:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 04:14, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to be a non-notable local politician, known only for routine coverage of her tenure as County Legislator of Niagara County, New York. She wasn't even required to stand for election. Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Sionk (talk) 21:33, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Obvious delete - no need for relist (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:39, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing notable. Runs a non notable Wharton alumni placement organization, and everything else is minor. Accepted by the CfD process, but shouldn't have been. The article on his association has been deleted once from mainspace, and declined there several times at AfC. DGG ( talk ) 16:56, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Courcelles 04:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So four valid sources have been provided (ignoring imdb), and all of them are short descriptions about two films the person this article is about has directed. But there are no sources at all that could establish the notability of the person independently. Even the films seem to be non-notable, judging by the extremely short descriptions made in the sources. The article seems to fail the criteria for notability. smtchahal(talk) 09:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. Michig (talk) 06:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Author of non notable self published books. Almost no library holdings in worldcat. DGG ( talk ) 01:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Procedural close. There is no argument for deletion, the pages have been marked for merger for years with no real opposition. J04n(talk page) 16:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CONTENTFORK of List of blues rock musicians. Although List of blues rock performers has more substance, both articles can be renamed to list of blues rock artists (and List of blues rock musicians is a broader name). Both have been proposed to be merged together, and List of blues rock performers has been tagged with the WP:OR warning. Both articles are entirely unsourced. List of blues rock performers fails WP:N. Curb Chain (talk) 21:31, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So the only problem as I see it is that there are two lists of redundant scope, so neither should be deleted, instead one should be merged into the other. As for whether "musicians" or "artists" is a better name for the list (either is better than "performers"), that renaming concern is also not an AFD issue, though I note that both are commonly used judging from the contents of Category:Lists of musicians by genre. postdlf (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OA journal publishing a handful of papers per year. Indexed in CAS, DOAJ, and (like almost all OA journals in the biomedical field) PubMed Central (and hence PubMed). None of these listings is particularly selective. No independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG. Randykitty (talk) 20:58, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was sof delete. J04n(talk page) 16:18, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like bogus Uberaccount (talk) 23:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was Delete. Although it was demonstrated that this individual is mentioned in the various sources, the consensus was that these mentions do not provide enough significant coverage to pass GNG. — CactusWriter (talk) 00:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable by WP:DIPLOMAT ("Diplomats who have participated in a significant way in events of particular diplomatic importance that have been written about in reliable secondary sources.") AFAIK Richardson, like most other diplomats, has never been involved in an “event of particular diplomatic importance”. Kleinzach 23:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
verifying her post is not the same as establishing notability. she fails WP:BIO, WP:DIPLOMAT and WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 04:33, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Kleinzach it really does not establish notability of Richardson. we need indepth coverage about her as the subject. LibStar (talk) 01:19, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
where does it say WP:GNG takes priority? for example, WP:ATHLETE, WP:PROF, WP:ENT take priority over WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 02:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The result was delete. There is already an entry at Wiktionary - if anyone wants anything from here to add to that please let me know. Michig (talk) 06:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dictionary definition. Hesperian 00:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]