Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gunhild Foerster


 * 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.  Kurykh  03:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Gunhild Foerster

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Unreferenced 25-word sub-stub on a very old person. Less of an article than a factoid, this sort of data belongs in a list. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non notable as per WP:BIO. - Gallo glass  14:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment – --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • I would say I see a project for you here looking at the three above articles :-)  Shoessss |  Chat  15:25, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. No significant coverage. Epbr123 (talk) 16:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete If age was a factor/criterion of WP:BIO then it would be a yes, it isn't so off to dev/null -- Web H amster  16:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge No substantial independent, reliable sources to establish meeting WP:N or WP:BIO. Nothing here that couldn't be summarized in the many supercentenarian lists. Cheers, CP 16:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Most supercentenarian factoids don't have articles. Neal (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC).
 * Reluctant Delete She was too young. It was just a factoid. &#39;&#39;&#91;&#91;User:Kitia&#124;Kitia&#93;&#93;&#39;&#39; (talk) 19:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Merge with list Victuallers (talk) 10:51, 14 December 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.