Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica Ogden


 * 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. Courcelles 21:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Jessica Ogden

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No references and seemingly no notability, just someone doing their job.  He  iro  21:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions.  — He  iro  21:15, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:52, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:52, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * delete, no claim of notability and no evidence for it, would have been candidate for speedy deletion (and in my view the AfD should be closed that way even if no one else contributes). Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:04, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I could find no entry for any "Jessica Ogden" in BGMI (Biography and Genealogy Master Index - heck, I'm in there). A search for "Jessica Ogden" and archaeology in Lexis-Nexis Academic (all newspapers, all time periods) turned up a potential candidate who graduated from Dartmouth and got some accolades (potential USA Today academic award?). In any case, those two proprietary sources didn't turn up anything that convinced me that this article should be retained. Mind you, someone developing software for ground penetrating radar has the potential for being famous some day, but nothing shows that that day is today. --Quartermaster (talk) 20:33, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete … Does not come close to WP:ACADEMIC or even WP:GNG … why are we still discussing this one? Happy Editing! &mdash;  21:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. According to what seems to be her blog she's two years out from a masters degree, so clearly WP:ACADEMIC doesn't apply. Potentially, WP:GNG could be used, if there were third-party sources about her, but there don't seem to be any. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Likely just a student's vanity page. Agricola44 (talk) 15:59, 21 December 2010 (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.