Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lindsay Blackwell


 * 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. Michig (talk) 07:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Lindsay Blackwell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article needs to be deleted because it lacks notability, and fails to meet the guidelines for that aforementioned issue. This article is just an example of unwarranted sense of self-importance. Why don't we go ahead and make a Wiki page for every person on the Earth too? Everyone's pets, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.185.98.207 (talk) 19:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment - I completed the nom for the IP. No opinion. ansh 666 20:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 June 15.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 21:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete as she has received some coverage as shown here and here but there's nothing to suggest she has independent notability aside from the company (further searches at Highbeam and Thefreelibrary found nothing of course). SwisterTwister   talk  04:50, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. I could find no additional references and thus nothing that would contradict the conclusion reached by SwisterTwister  or support a finding of notability. Donner60 (talk) 03:26, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Current "sources" really don't meet WP:RS -- further, the article does not say what, if anything, LB is notable for. My news sweeps did not reveal anything much.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 22:05, 22 June 2015 (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.


 * 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.