Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melanie Wood


 * 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 per WP:N and WP:SNOW (non-admin closure). Sean MD80 talk 22:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Melanie Wood

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

NUMEROUS people on the talk page have pointed out this woman is NOT NOTABLE. The only reason this is still here is because User: C S has made it his personal crusade to defend this page. Johnnygood (talk) 23:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. However, I would be open to persuasion if it could be shown that she was a notable mathematician rather than just a promising one. Capitalistroadster (talk) 23:57, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Probably notable within the world of competitive mathematics (I never knew such a thing existed, but that's what we're here for) for her various prizes and fellowships; would definitely pass WP:BIO if she were (mutatis mutandis) an athlete or musician. Tevildo (talk) 00:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * (Upgrade per dtrebbien) Tevildo (talk) 02:10, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Non mathematics people don't understand that MathCounts, International Mathematical Olympiad, and the Putnam Competition are extremely difficult tests for the respective groups of test takers. To have done well in all three is extremely notable. It's not just a sign of a promising career. « D. Trebbien ( talk ) 01:43 2008 January 20 (UTC)
 * Johnnygood isn't a sock puppet account, is it? The only contributions were to nominate Melanie Wood for deletion.


 * Keep Article contains ample references to demonstrate notability. Colonel Warden (talk) 04:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I think Mrs. Wood is a future star mathematician. It is a notable biography. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 09:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not yet notable purely for her academic record, but clearly notable for the competition record and the "firsts" as a female. And, in reply to the nominator, ONLY ONE person on the talk page has said that the subject is not notable. The other discussions concern categorisation and the length of the article, not notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. As a researcher in mathematics she may be promising but not yet notable, but nonetheless she is notable for her quite unusual history even if not for research she's published so far. Michael Hardy (talk) 16:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. as per Michael Hardy. Ubermichael (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Quite notable. Also, possible one-purpose account is nominator. Nousernamesleft talk and matrix? 19:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - a cursory Google news search uncovers a lot of coverage in addition to the sources already cited. -- Whpq (talk) 21:08, 20 January 2008 (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.