Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susanna Mildred Hill


 * 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   no consensus. JForget 22:15, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Susanna Mildred Hill

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

unremarkable person. Coverage, yes - coverage in one line in an article on confidence tricks in a non-notable blog. Ironholds (talk) 17:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:33, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - As a confidence trickster from the 1940's sourcing may be a bit difficult and much of that sourcing may be offline. This Charlotte Observer article calls her "the most famous practitioner of the so-called Lonely Hearts scam", and The Nation from Thailand also provides some coverage of her and the Lonely Hearts scam.  This book also provides coverage about her. -- Whpq (talk) 19:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Jake   Wartenberg  01:37, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This is an unreferenced stub and has been for four years. Obviously no one gives enough of a damn about it to do anything with it. Drawn Some (talk) 17:31, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * comment - Stubs are perfectly valid articles if the subject is notable. We don't know who, when, or why somebody might come along to improve the article, but it's hard to build upon on an artcile if we insist on deleting it because it hasn't been worked on for a while. -- Whpq (talk) 18:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep Whpq has shown reliable sources exist. Edward321 (talk) 03:01, 3 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.