Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zia McCabe (2nd nomination)


 * 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   speedy keep. Article nominated before by the same editor; the result is the same, even more forcefully so. See WP:NOTAGAIN. Drmies (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Zia McCabe
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

She is not established as notable for a Wikipedia page. LF (talk) 00:17, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 00:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 00:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep and speedy close. Only issue is whether there should be an independent article or this merged into the band article. That is a routine editing decision, not an AFD matter. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 00:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - The person has received significant coverage in reliable sources; the topic passes WP:GNG:
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 01:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Well more than a hundred Google News hits? It looks like WP:BEFORE was not followed by the nominator if there isn't even any nomination rationale dealing with that. --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 01:22, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The nominator here is the same person who last year nominated all of the other The Dandy Warhols members' articles &mdash;, , and &mdash; for deletion.  Xe appears to be using fallacious "If article X then article Y." reasoning rather than looking at individual subjects on their individual merits.  Uncle G (talk) 13:47, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep — Individual notable, as per credible searches. C(u)w(t)C(c) 02:20, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, poorly-researched nomination which clearly meets any and all relevant guidelines for inclusion.  coccyx bloccyx  (toccyx)  19:20, 20 May 2012 (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.
 * Speedy keep, poorly-researched nomination which clearly meets any and all relevant guidelines for inclusion.  coccyx bloccyx  (toccyx)  19:20, 20 May 2012 (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.