Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melissa Brown (3rd nomination)


 * 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. After reviewing this and the previous 2 discussions, it appears that consensus hasn't changed (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Melissa Brown
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This might be a tough one, but I don't see established notability. Subject is a Philadelphia ophthalmologist and 2x unsuccessful candidate for Congress, neither of which are enough to establish notability. So, per WP:BIO there must be published, independent, and reliable secondary source material published about the subject. There are some such articles, but they are all pretty weak and in the context of the subject's failed political candidacy, and thus, per WP:BIO not enough in of themselves enough to establish notability. --A. Gorilla (talk) 01:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note:From reading past AFDs, I see the subject published "120 medical articles," but there's no evidence that these are from peer-reviewed articles. A. Gorilla (talk) 01:27, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep two significant campaigns and the publications which easily meet WP:PROF (journals include Ophthalmology, Archives of Ophthalmology e.g.; ). JJL (talk) 01:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep One of the two would lean towards me arguing to delete. However, the two of them combined suggests that she is potentially "of note". Sceptre (talk) 13:01, 30 April 2009 (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.