Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joanne Nova


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 11:02, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Joanne Nova

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

BLP of dubious notability, with the usual associated arguments about reliable sourcing for someone not really quite notable. William M. Connolley (talk) 16:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —Sailsbystars (talk) 16:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete It's really on the fence for WP:BASIC. While she's popular in the blogosphere, most mentions in reliable sources are incidental (and few and far between).  The closest I can find to something directly addressing her notability is this article, but it's an opinion piece, so I don't think it counts as a RS.  Sailsbystars (talk) 17:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep- meets WP:GNG and WP:V Minor4th  20:28, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Seems to meet WP:GNG VASterling (talk) 19:48, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep per WP:GNG, as was mentioned already. --Slon02 (talk) 00:24, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable and verified Cullen328 (talk) 04:56, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG. -- JN 466  15:11, 3 October 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.