Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quinn Lemley


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Quinn Lemley

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

Not at all clear that a one-night performance off-Broadway makes for notability, nor does an unsourced assertion of resemblance to a famous person. Article references long past events in the future tense, indicating no upkeep. bd2412 T 04:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as the single reference provided does not establish notability. Boston (talk) 08:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - provided a couple of interview links on the talk page.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:22, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Nothing about those references indicates the notability of the subject. If expressing music preferences and bearing a physical resemblance to a famous person were enough to qualify for an article, most of us would be in the encyclopedia. bd2412  T 22:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * SarekOfVulcan, why did you add links to talk page rather than incorporating references into the article where they belong and can be considered in the debate? Boston (talk) 03:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Because I didn't have the time to do it properly. And nothing says that the sources actually have to be in the article to count for the debate: just that they have to be available.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:02, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: insufficient notability. JamesBurns (talk) 01:04, 19 January 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) 00:02, 20 January 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.