Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LaSara Firefox


 * 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. W.marsh 16:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

LaSara FireFox


Appears to be insufficiently notable. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 14:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, published author, notable in the pagan community. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 14:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Ekajati. -999 (Talk) 16:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete From the information currently included in the the article, I can"t see much that makes her notable. I'd need some citations that she is "a recognized spokesperson" and/or a leader. Has she accomplished things? Yes, but that, in itself, is not notable. I just need more proof than what is in this entry now, which reads more like promotional copy than an encyclopedia entry. When stripped of the puff words, the promotional resume verbiage, I'm mostly left with her being an author of one book. --Pigman (talk &bull; contribs) 19:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable enough based on references. --Oakshade 22:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Being notable within a community does not mean much.  After all, each of us can be notable within our own groups, but that does not warrant inclusion in an encyclopaedia.  I would expect at least notabilty as a representative known outside the community.  As stated above, remove the PR and there's not a lot left.  Emeraude 23:05, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Tons of media coverage, it seems. --- RockMFR 01:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep most notable people are not notable outside their community. The pagan community is a distinct minority. Unless you are a member of the community, you will not have heard of many notable Buddhists either. The community itself is the most reliable judge of a person's notability. Let the Hindus decide who is a notable Hindu, the Buddhists who is a notable Buddhist, and the pagans who is a notable pagan. Many who are notable are never noticed by mainstream media. That is as true of other religions and moreso of paganism. &mdash;Hanuman Das 01:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Note that I (nominator) am a practicing pagan with an extensive library and have never heard of her. Not that I'm saying that my hearing of someone equates with notability, but frankly she's a minor figure at best, and the third-party verifiable sources are very minimal.  For me, she doesn't meet my personal bar of article-worthiness because of how sub-stubby sticking to only the verifiable facts would make that article. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 11:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Please note that notability is not governed by a subjective criterion.  Notability should be evident regardless of whether one is a member of a particular community or not, by virtue of the independent and verifiable/reliable sources available concerning the subject.  In this case, I believe there is enough independent interest in the subject to count her as being notable, but the article needs a lot of work to get rid of the aggrandizing tone and present only notable facts.  -- Dachannien TalkContrib 02:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. Quite sufficient information supporting notability has been provided. I also agree with Hanuman Das' argument concerning notability in a community. Rosencomet 18:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. per Ekajati. Foolio93 03:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. True, notoriety within a community would result in an avalanche of niche entries. However LaSara is also called from outside a community (Playboy, SexTV) to represent the community - and as such is likely to be known outside the community. wolfharper 01:04, 5 December 2006 (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.