Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Hull


 * 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. Consensus is for deletion. North America1000 16:37, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Ruth Hull

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article PRODded with reason " Not a single reliable source given that is about the subject. Those that do mention her are blog posts and such. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:BIO." Article dePRODded by article creator without reason given. PROD reason still stands, hence: Delete. Randykitty (talk) 09:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Randykitty (talk) 20:56, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Per the nom. Weak sourcing, no evidence of notability. AusLondonder (talk) 21:44, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This relies entirely on blogs and a user-generated discussion forum for sourcing, with the exception of a single news article which isn't about her — in fact, the newspaper article fails to even contain a mention of her name at all, serving only to confirm the association of another unrelated person with an organization this person is also involved in. And nothing here is compelling enough to constitute an automatic notability freebie in the absence of adequate sourcing. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 01:10, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete She organized a club to connect teenagers with progessive politicians. I see no actual claim to notability and no sourcing to demonstrate this has been noticed in reliable sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:51, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as currently containing nothing for the applicable notability, simply not convincing. SwisterTwister   talk  05:12, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:GNG. &mdash; Music1201  talk  22:44, 3 May 2016 (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.