Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendy Northcutt


 * 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. — Kurykh  23:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Wendy Northcutt

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non-noteworthy person, little information in article, any interview links should be merged with darwin award category, lack of verifiable biographical details, page was created by wendy northcutt herself Vitas77 06:12, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

furthermore, this is an encyclopedia not a collection of everything as friday put it..

hopefully he will abide by his own logic, cited in his many many deletions and not by biased by his friendship with wendy northcutt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.55.18.209 (talk)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 10:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep With interviews in major news outlets, a notable website and books, this seems to satisfy WP:BIO requirements. However, the fact that it's been edited by the article subject raises WP:COI concerns. The article requires substantial cleanup and rewriting, but it should be kept and improved. Eliz81(talk)(contribs) 21:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Author/editor of numerous books published by a significant publishing house, and with coverage from several independent sources this passes WP:BIO. It wasn't actually created by Wendy herself, though she has made significant edits, not all of which are NPOV - but that's reason for cleaning up the article, not deleting it. And what on earth does 67.55.18.209 mean by "hopefully he will abide by his own logic...not by biased by his friendship" - is someone trying to make a WP:POINT? Iain99 22:03, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment if you look through the contribution history of the IP, it looks like the person made an appeal for contact from Ms. Northcutt directly by email, and then followed that with a request for CSD . This suggests a WP:COI, and given the wording of the nomination, this suggests that the nomination was not made in the interest of encyclopedia building. I suggest Speedy Keep and close by admin (especially in light of the subject's notability clearly being established). Eliz81(talk)(contribs) 00:31, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect into Darwin Awards. No evidence of notability beyond the website/books, and the substantive amterial about her (unlike the "klutz" quote) is pretty thin. --Dhartung | Talk 02:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This article discusses an author with published works readily available at countless general interest bookstores around the world, not to mention a Web site that was pioneering and remains significant in the realm of online humor. This nomination drips with animus and flies in the face of facts that are far from secret or undocumented.  The article could surely benefit from some work, but the Web work and the published literature of the subject each establish a level of cultural impact placing her unambiguously in the scope of Wikipedia.  To suggest otherwise simply strains credibility.  Demonweed 22:41, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per citations provided asserting notability. --Aarktica 23:32, 30 July 2007 (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.