Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Rosalen


 * 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The result was   keep, withdrawn by nominator with no other dissenting opinions. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Rachel Rosalen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability concerns and no citations. giso6150 (talk) 23:36, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent)|lambast 01:16, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep I have copied over the citations and external links from the ptWP. I think they make the notability clear. It is a little rash to decide an enWP article is unreferenceable without at least checking  the corresponding article in the language of the subject.  DGG ( talk ) 06:53, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, but with improvements or PNJCS. Thank you,, for copying those citations and links. I agree that it would be rash to claim that this article is unreferenceable—in fact, I found this myself. I did read both versions of the article and I looked at the edit history for each. This article has been orphaned in more ways than one, however, and I wanted some discussion about whether or not the subject was, in fact, ”…regarded as an important figure … widely cited by peers or successors … known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique, etc.” WP:ARTIST. Neither the ptWP or enWP article has had significant work done in the past 4–5 years and notability can change. —giso6150 (talk) 23:42, 17 March 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.