| Revision as of 20:22, 22 May 2005 editXezbeth (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators282,561 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:08, 22 May 2005 edit undoMel Etitis (talk | contribs)60,375 edits KeepNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| *'''Keep''' since it's been kept twice recently. ] 19:56, 22 May 2005 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' since it's been kept twice recently. ] 19:56, 22 May 2005 (UTC) | ||
| *While this VfD is too soon after the last one, '''Delete''' as non-notable. She only gets 167 google hits, none of the "films" she's been in are notable, and her fellow "actors" have for the most part been deleted already. —] 20:22, May 22, 2005 (UTC) | *While this VfD is too soon after the last one, '''Delete''' as non-notable. She only gets 167 google hits, none of the "films" she's been in are notable, and her fellow "actors" have for the most part been deleted already. —] 20:22, May 22, 2005 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep'''. I have no idea why so many people think that the notability-criterion has to be so high for people when it's so low for everything else. Why the rather snide scare quotes, incidentally? Is this part of the peculiar sub-current that's going on this case, with three nominations for VfD in five months, and defacement of the article? Am I missing something? ] (] 21:08, 22 May 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:08, 22 May 2005
Lorna Nogueira
This page should be deleted because as User:R. fiend states the votes were counted wrong and the person who the page was written about is no-notable and has even contacted Misplaced Pages expressing that she should not be included because of this. MichaelMoore 18:27, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
- VfD is not about vote-counting — read Misplaced Pages:Guide to Votes for deletion: "The purpose of the discussion is to achieve consensus upon a course of action. The votes are a means to gauge consensus, and not the ends in themselves (Misplaced Pages is not a democracy)."
- She didn't say that she shouldn't be included, only that she wouldn't mind if editors did delete the article on her.
- Her point wasn't based on a technicality of the voting system.
- This article has survived two VfDs this year, the last less than two months ago. What's going on here? is there something personal in the air? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:56, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
- I closed the last VfD. The statement that is was closed wrong is a result of User:R. fiend's belief that a 2:1 ratio of votes to delete should result in an article's deletion. For the purpose of closing VfDs, I do not accept that 2:1 constitutes a rough consensus, so I closed the listing--and other votes with similar results--with no consensus. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 19:58, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
- Keep since it's been kept twice recently. Kappa 19:56, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
- While this VfD is too soon after the last one, Delete as non-notable. She only gets 167 google hits, none of the "films" she's been in are notable, and her fellow "actors" have for the most part been deleted already. —Xezbeth 20:22, May 22, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. I have no idea why so many people think that the notability-criterion has to be so high for people when it's so low for everything else. Why the rather snide scare quotes, incidentally? Is this part of the peculiar sub-current that's going on this case, with three nominations for VfD in five months, and defacement of the article? Am I missing something? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:08, 22 May 2005 (UTC)