Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Rogers Chepiga


 * 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   speedy deleted by Alexf, CSD G7: One author who has requested deletion or blanked the page. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Pamela Rogers Chepiga

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:BIO notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Lots of lawyers file amicus briefs (indeed, I have, and no one on Wikipedia thought it was notable). One source is WP:PRIMARY, the other mentions her in one sentence in the context of the larger litigation. THF (talk) 22:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 22:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 22:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Guantanamo Bay detainment camp-related deletion discussions.  —Geo Swan (talk) 22:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, notability is not inherited. Ariticle also looks like a WP:COATRACK for another issue. See also WP:BLP1E. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 23:51, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of significant coverage as required by WP:BIO. Ray  Talk 21:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment, if specific detainees are added, Keep, otherwise, Delete Sherurcij (speaker for the dead) 01:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Even if names are added of clients, the subject still fails notability. Notability is not inherited, and it is not ascribed by rubbing shoulders with notable people either.  --Yachtsman1 (talk) 04:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Explanation -- Let me own up to having tunnel vision, and creating this, and a few other articles, without anticipating them being challenged, or that they would not survive those challenges. Let me acknowledge this article will not survive this afd.  I requested advice here about moving articles to user space, while they were deing discussed for deletion.  Based on this advice I am going to move this article to my user space, where I will look for more coverage.  If I can't find enough to justify an expansion and move back to article space I will cannibalize the references for use elsewhere.  If I think I have found better references and expanded it to the point it won't be challenged, I will consult others, including the administrator who closed this discussion.  Geo Swan (talk) 10:12, 12 March 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.