Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terra Lawson-Remer


 * 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. Nakon 03:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Terra Lawson-Remer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

She may or may not be notable, but this is a press release where the promotional element is so extensive, that I have been unable to improve it. Better to start over.  DGG ( talk ) 00:51, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Comment - I don't know if the article is a "press release", but it certainly suffers from over referencing which makes notability hard to judge, at the very least. Lawson-Remer does not appear to pass WP:PROF, so would have to pass the GNG to be notable.  I check a couple sources and found they were either trivial mentions or primary sources, but I didn't check nearly all 45 so I can't make a firm conclusion.  Perhaps  who accepted this at AfC can give some guidance at which sources to check. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:11, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sing! 07:11, 18 February 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 17:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice. I think David's PR assessment is correct, not to mention there seems to be no credible claim to notability. Agricola44 (talk) 16:49, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. There's so much Wikipuffery here that I'm truly unable to discern whether there is any actual notability, and looking elsewhere (e.g. Google scholar) turns up nothing. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. "...which aspires to revolutionize rights development research by measuring governmental capacity..." bleh. Wikipedia is not a résumé-polisher. Pax 08:34, 28 February 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.