Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erin Lucas


 * 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   no consensus.  MBisanz  talk 23:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Erin Lucas

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

Lacks notability. JaimeAnnaMoore (talk)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 17:52, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - perhaps a sysop can check if this is a repost of Erin Williams? &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  18:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope. I looked and the deleted Erin Williams article is probably about someone else. Tabercil (talk) 19:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  00:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Daughter of somebody famous, best friend of somebody semi-famous, but notability is not inherited. WP:BLP1E also applies as she doesn't seem to have done anything significant aside from appearing on a reality show. — 97198 (talk) 02:36, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I feel that the above users seem to have not done their homework on this one. A couple of points, here. First, WP:BLP1E seems to have been misinterpreted in this case: Lucas' role in the television show is ongoing. She is a cast member after all. Also, the point that she is the daughter of Cliff Williams is irrelevant, yes, but should not disqualify the article's existence on those grounds, as some seem to be implying. In addition, in accordance with WP:BIO, I've found this source mentioning her, this source, this source, this source, this source, this source, this source, this source, and this source. So even though most of us Wikipedians wouldn't care about such a topic, the intended audience would, and our own policies that we do care about back this up.  Jd 027  talk 16:53, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:00, 19 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.