Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Margo Rey

Relation to other AfD'd article
The discussion has veered quite a bit from the AfD for this article, so I am responding to [ on the talk page.

I am not really sure what your point or question is. While the nominator did not mention the other AfD in the nomination here, it generally would not have been appropriate to do so.

But the two articles were discussed in conjunction in a number of places including the very prominent Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard/Archive158. -- The Red Pen of Doom  18:16, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I have no question and I believe I made my point clear. You made a claim that the previous article was the reason that this one was nominated and I said that I would have a) no way of knowing that because it wasn't mentioned and b) no way of disputing you since I cannot see the edit history of the deleted article.  But if your argument is that it shouldn't be noted (per WP:OTHERCRAP), then why use that as the justification in your comments?  When you make a claim as to how and why the nomination occurred, please be prepared to defend it rather than come in after and say it doesn't matter and it shouldn't have been part of it in the first place.


 * At the end of the day, I don't care what condition the article was in when it was nominated and I simply don't care how it came to be nominated. I do care that my comments seem to be refuted at each turn with yet more doubt.  I do care that there seems to be questions (such as "can we really be sure they're the same person?") that you had already explored in your notation of her previous experience (noted in your 'weak keep' entry).  Vertium '' When all is said and done 04:15, 19 August 2012 (UTC)