Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosenkowitz sextuplets


 * 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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Rosenkowitz sextuplets

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article about sextuplets which does not thoroughly state notability. Simply being born and surviving should is not encyclopedic. TM 14:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Being first fully surviving set of sextuplets generating sufficient coverage to establish notability. Whether the circumstance "should" be enough to generate notability is irrelevant to actual notability. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per reasons stated by Hullaballoo Wolfowitz. B.Rossow talk contr 17:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. I quickly added two refs to support notability claim. --Milowent (talk) 21:32, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've added enough now there's no doubt this will be kept. suggest nom. be withdrawn. --Milowent (talk) 04:56, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per wolfowitz.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:21, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Keep Keep Keep Keep Keep Oh give me a break. Believe it or not, it was big news back in the 1970s when sextuplets were born and survived.  Maybe we should delete the Dionne quintuplets article as well, since being born and surviving is not encyclopedic? Mandsford (talk) 15:02, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions.  --  Fences  &amp;  Windows  21:07, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  --  Fences  &amp;  Windows  21:08, 22 September 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.