Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Blaby


 * 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. —Tom Morris (talk) 21:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Helen Blaby

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This person does not seem to meet our notability requirements, and IMHO lacks substantial independent non-trivial RS coverage. Epeefleche (talk) 22:36, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 03:40, 14 January 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete unremarkable traffic reporter. Lacks significant coverage in 3rd party sources. RadioFan (talk) 00:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep There appears to be enough written about Blaby to make her notable, per requirements and guidelines, including articles in the The Telegraph and British Journalism Review. AuthorAuthor (talk) 01:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment -  referred to in a British Journalism Review article doesn't impress me as the kind of significant coverage that WP:BIO is looking for.  The number of 3rd party sources doesn't matter, it's the depth of the coverage that tells us how notable this subject is.--RadioFan (talk) 01:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - Thanks for commenting. I found another article in The Independent where she was interviewed with others for a feature story. But I agree; more in-depth pieces would help, although I don't think she's "unremarkable." AuthorAuthor (talk) 05:29, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 12:17, 21 January 2012 (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.