Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dianna Abdala


 * 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. Chick Bowen 02:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Dianna Abdala

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Person is not notable. This person's only claim to fame is that she sent an embarrassing email that was circulated on the Internet. Jacobsor 05:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. fails WP:BIO and WP:N.  --Sc straker 05:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and above. People f*** up their reputations in email every day - why is this one any different?  The article attempts, and fails, to link this person to truly notable public email gaffes (involving people who were already public figures) of the past couple of years - if such a link were possible I'd almost give pause to this, but... --    deth me0w    05:28, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E. henrik  • talk  06:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. &rArr;    SWAT Jester    Denny Crane.  13:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. This is an example of one aspect of the social effect of e-mail: be careful about what you write, because it can be shared with a click of the mouse with the world. Not one of the most important or interesting (which means I may not endorse deletion -- but I won't object to it); however, no such article currently exists about social faux pas with email, a topic that I believe would be notable & needs to be written. -- llywrch 16:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I am happy to see that we are deleting an article that is sourced by both the Boston Globe and The Wall Street Journal, to name a few.  This is obviously a "single event" type article.  Why is it again that this cannot be converted into an article about THE EVENT rather than focusing the title on the person?    Bur nt sau ce  22:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Why on earth was this newsworthy? As Llywrch says maybe there should be a social faux pas with email article, as I think thats the aspect that these articles go at the most, not the specific situation.  While not actually a reason for deletion, this is a humdrum event with no lasting repercussions on its own.  Wickethewok 16:14, 8 October 2007 (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.