Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luseane Halaevalu Mataʻaho


 * 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. Although there's not overwhelming consensus to delete based solely on notability, there's enough agreement on copyright issues. slakr \ talk / 03:19, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Luseane Halaevalu Mataʻaho

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced orphan that doesn't appear to be notable, assuming it is even real and not a made up thing or a hoax (which it appears to be to me). 3gg5amp1e (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:46, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Comment This article was written by a longstanding member of to.wiki; I would think it is about a real person. I've asked him/her to comment here. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:45, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I have added a reference that verifies the content of the article (though I'm now confused about whether "Luseane" is a title or part of her name). There also appears to be content about her in this book  though I can't see what based on snippet mode.  Given the likely difficulty of finding digitized sources regarding Tongan royalty in the 19th century, I'd err on the side of keeping -- though I'm not totally sure re: notability. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:02, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete - the added reference shows that the entire article is a copyright violation. Wholesale cut and paste.--Rpclod (talk) 04:49, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not cut-and-paste. The paraphrase may be on the somewhat close side, but I think it's acceptable. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:31, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 10:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - should have been speedied; cut/paste/copyright violation-ridden article about non-notable individual. Quis separabit?  00:42, 28 May 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.