Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelly Coakley


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 16:15, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Kelly Coakley

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Lack of notabilty, WP:BLP1E. Event is also not notable. News reports end in Aug-Sep 2006; indicating false advertising suit was dismissed. KeptSouth (talk) 13:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E, WP:NOT, as nominator says. If she had won her case, that would be something else. Ray  Talk 20:29, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per argument above. Blip in the news for dismissed suit with no lasting impact whatsoever does not equal notability.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 23:12, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:PERSISTENCE. Normally the issue for a BLP1E is to simply rename it into the event for which they're notable, but the event isn't notable.  The complaint was never even served on the defendant according to the NY County docket.  THF (talk) 01:34, 24 January 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.