Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jana Jeruma-Grinberga


 * 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   keep. postdlf (talk) 04:56, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Jana Jeruma-Grinberga

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG. Unable to find any news articles from the Google God that would show notability. Seems to be a bit of presumed notability due to a title.  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 07:00, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Notability difficult to establish. Further, it has been created, I think, in bad faith by someone with an axe to grind. Have a look at their contributions and in particular at the blog link they wanted to add to Lutheran Church in Great Britain. It's just an attack on this woman. This encyclopaedia should be an encyclopaedia, not a repository for someone wishing to leverage their personal, external campaign. DBaK (talk) 07:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:11, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:11, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:11, 22 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep -- The Lutheran Church is a minnow in UK, but I would have thought that its senior leaders (such as the subject) were notable, but I would prefer to see more context. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep As noted in the article cited in the Wikipedia article, the Lutheran Church in the UK is small. But this is the first woman Bishop in UK history and it's been covered as such for its significance not just within the Lutheran sphere, but with respect to the Catholic and Protestant churches as well. The article cited in the article covers her and the appointment substantially. I'm not seeing any issue here and I think this subject is a strong keep of obvious historical import. Candleabracadabra (talk) 17:41, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - As per Candleabracadabra, she's also received significant coverage in |The Telegraph article. I can't see how this is has been deemed an attack page. 86.136.93.185 (talk) 20:37, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That's possibly because you have not read or understood what I wrote. You need to look at the history a bit to see what is going on and what the user LutheranFacts (obviously a username denoting a massive lack of bias or mission, right?) is actually up to. Having said that, I have no strong feeling that it absolutely must go, but please bear in mind that if you keep the article you may well have to keep an eye on it, and the antics of her detractor(s), to avoid BLP issues. But, seriously, if you don't understand it don't comment on it. I don't have the time to spare for this so I am unwatching this page and wish you well in your endeavours. Happy editing. DBaK (talk) 09:55, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep That a BLP will need watching is not a reason for deletion. Bishops of churches such as this are normally considered notable here, and it meets the GNG.  DGG ( talk ) 16:07, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Withdraw I am, apparently, mistaken in regards to the notability. I would have closed this myself however there is a delete !vote.  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 17:26, 25 August 2013 (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.