Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regina Hopper


 * 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. NW ( Talk ) 23:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Regina Hopper

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Article is about a person with questionable notability, and is still a stub despite being two years old. I dream of horses (T) @ 20:09, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - very little significant coverage in independent sources (i.e. not press releases). Fails WP:BIO. Claritas § 20:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, for several reasons. 1. There is no deadline to fix articles. 2. Stubs are valid. 3. This is a BLP with three sources.  4. We should follow the past precedent of past outcomes at Articles for deletion/Pete Williams (journalist) and similar discussions about reporters.  5. There are thousands of other possible sources online that should have been looked at before nomination. Bearian (talk) 23:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I have to get back to grading midterms. I think it's good enough to keep. Bearian (talk) 23:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep The news media considers this person notable enough to mention them. And when someone discusses the actions of a company, they are discussion the decisions of the CEO, at least in this case.  The company doesn't decide on its own to do things, all major actions go through the CEO.   D r e a m Focus  03:04, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - per WP:ANYBIO as the subject has won an Emmy Award and meets WP:GNG. She get plenty of ghits on PRNewswire which easily could be added to her article for improvement as an alternate to deletion. moreno oso (talk) 04:52, 2 July 2010 (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.