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. Cbrown1023 talk 00:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ronna Herman[edit]

Ronna_Herman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)

There is no assertion of notability except from its own sources. There are just about no external reviews of this subject, and a search reveals very little about this subject. On concern here is Wikipedia:Attribution and Wikipedia:Notability. This subject seems very obscure (not very well known) to be posted in an encyclopedia. --Snooziums 20:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: Snooziums may be listing these as a response to another AFD, rather than on their particular merit or lack thereof. Snooziums, have you read WP:POINT?

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 17:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, per my nomination. --Snooziums 20:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 10:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• delete This one appears not notable and with nothing resembling sources. The bad faith nom is troubling, but the article is no unsatisfactory that it is worth deleting. DGG 00:37, 13 March 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.