Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carol Morgan


 * 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 snow keep. (non-admin closure) gidonb (talk) 06:30, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Carol Morgan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject requests page deletion JEM1406a (talk) 15:22, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 15:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 15:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 15:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2018 September 18.  —<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot I  <sub style="margin-left:-13.5ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 15:58, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. "Subject requests" is not a reason for deletion. She is notable, and the article is not defamatory. Maproom (talk) 17:18, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow keep - there is no evidence showing that the subject of the article wants the page deleted, this deletion rationale is moot and as such there is no valid rationale for deletion. Recommend a WP:SNOW closure. Kirbanzo (talk) 18:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * What is the correct way for Morgan to provide evidence that she wants the article about her to be deleted? Absent that, what is the correct way for  to provide that evidence?  GoingBatty (talk) 19:22, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * An email or statement that the subject would allow to be public would be good evidence - and for presentation of evidence, an external link should suffice. Kirbanzo (talk) 00:40, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * It would be evidence, yes. But it would not warrant deleting the article. Maproom (talk) 07:48, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Subject is not a low-profile individual as she has given interviews to widely available publications. No controversial information on the page, and no personal information now I've removed the unsourced precise date of birth (year was easily sourced). Article has independent reliable sources to meet the general notability guidelines. Qwfp (talk) 20:44, 18 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep We do not delete articles on request.  How many negative articles would we whitewash knowledge of if we took the advice of the subject?  Preposterous.  Clearly meets notability guidelines, represented her national team in the World Championships this year. Trackinfo (talk) 05:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:04, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

The subject of the article can be referred to Biographies_of_living_persons; especially the section called Dealing with articles about yourself. If the details and reasoning of the subject's request for deletion cannot be shared publicly, then an e-mail request can be made to the Wikimedia Foundation's volunteer response team (known as OTRS). Contact  with a link to the article and provide details of the concerns. Scottyoak2 (talk) 17:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.