Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denise Lester


 * 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. Shimeru (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Denise Lester

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable litigator lacking GHits and GNEWS hits of substance. Appears to fail WP:BIO.  ttonyb (talk) 03:12, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, I cannot find substantial reliable-source coverage of her. Looks to be just part of her marketing effort.   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 20:31, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Just your average broadcaster only with a law degree. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 15:17, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom Codf1977 (talk) 16:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 *  Do Not Delete Lawyer 1st and foremost,expert media trained legal spokesperson for the Law society (normally 1st call for breaking news).Contributor to BBC video nation in personal capacity. Lvadmaker (talk) 13:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC) — Lvadmaker (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment – please explain how this meets the criteria in WP:BIO.  ttonyb  (talk) 15:59, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment reply – I am new to this, but I think? I have added a secondary source i.e. NBC as a publisher in the last added web link this was found on google video search, there may be links on utube to other tv news articles but I'm not sure if they can be linked to, as they may breach "copywrite" of original broadcaster. I also added the Pope John Paul 2 link from the BBC website. Lvadmaker (talk) 16:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment – Unfortunately being quoted by the BBC is not the same as being the "subject of" the coverage nor is it substantial coverage of the individual. Please see notability and reliable sources for more information.   ttonyb  (talk) 17:48, 7 April 2010 (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.