Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrea J. Prasow


 * 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   speedy deleted by Alexf, CSD G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Andrea J. Prasow

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Flunks WP:BIO. An associate with an American law firm, not independently notable, notwithstanding WP:PUFF in biography. THF (talk) 21:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 22:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 22:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Guantanamo Bay detainment camp-related deletion discussions.  —Geo Swan (talk) 22:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment -- Nominator cites WP:PUFF as if it were a wikipedia policy. In fact it is an essay, started by the nominator him or herself.  Geo Swan (talk) 22:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, notability is not inherited. Ariticle also looks like a WP:COATRACK for another issue. See also WP:BLP1E. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 23:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of independent notability (and I tried searching for biographic sources) no content we should have that is not already in Salim Hamdan. With nothing to merge, the usual BLP1E solution of merging doesn't apply.  With no notability, deletion is appropriate.  GRBerry 02:00, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, coatrack. Stifle (talk) 13:58, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:COATRACK and WP:BLP1E. The subject is simply not notable.--Yachtsman1 (talk) 17:40, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Explanation -- Let me own up to having tunnel vision, and creating this, and a few other articles, without anticipating them being challenged, or that they would not survive those challenges. Let me acknowledge this article will not survive this afd.  I requested advice here about moving articles to user space, while they were deing discussed for deletion.  Based on this advice I am going to move this article to my user space, where I will look for more coverage.  If I can't find enough to justify an expansion and move back to article space I will cannibalize the references for use elsewhere.  If I think I have found better references and expanded it to the point it won't be challenged, I will consult others, including the administrator who closed this discussion.  Geo Swan (talk) 10:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * 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.