Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Penny Reedie


 * 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 redirect to List of Canadian High Commissioners to New Zealand. (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 01:45, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Penny Reedie

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

fails WP:BIO. ambassadors are not inherently notable. I could only find minor coverage. LibStar (talk) 03:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect - to List of Canadian High Commissioners to New Zealand. Per WP:DIPLOMAT there is no presumed notability for Ambassadors  (See High Commissioner (Commonwealth))  and they should be redirected to the appropriate list article when one exists. Not enough coverage in reliable sources to verify and sustain an article. Fails general notability and WP:ANYBIO.  J bh  Talk  13:56, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:45, 29 May 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:24, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect - to List of Canadian High Commissioners to New Zealand as per . No content or coverage to justify a stand-alone article. DerbyCountyinNZ  (Talk Contribs) 12:09, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per DerbyCountyinNZ and Jbhunley NealeFamily (talk) 03:13, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Diplomats are not entitled to keep unsourced or primary sourced articles — they certainly qualify for Wikipedia articles if they're the subject of enough reliable source coverage to satisfy WP:GNG, but they do not get an automatic notability freebie just because they exist. But with the only source here being a deadlinked directory listing on DFAIT's own website, GNG has not been met. Redirect to the list per basically everybody who's commented so far; no prejudice against recreation in the future if real sourcing starts showing up. Bearcat (talk) 18:54, 10 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.