Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Wilford W. Andersen

Black Kite, regarding your decision that "it would be better to nominate them individually and thus I am closing no consensus", could you elaborate on why it would be better to nominate them individually? I was the nominator, and my opinion is obviously that it would be better to nominate them as a group. Only one of the 13 articles was singled out for individual comment, and the opinions on the group of articles were essentially the same as presented in the prior individual nominations. ––Agyle (talk) 19:00, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Makes it easier to analyze, majority of voters won't check all articles but only a few and base opinion about all articles. Anything like "probably rest are notable too".  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 19:08, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with Agyle. The articles are all essentially identical in form and very similar in content and sources. The primary issue of notability for all of the subjects of these articles is based on their membership in the LDS Second Quorum of the Seventy. That was clearly the motivating factor in each article's creation. It would be better to treat all of them as a class, and either keep all or delete all based on whether membership in that class is sufficient to establish notability. If there are any exceptions (i.e. additional independent grounds for notability) those individuals will be obvious and stand out. Vojen (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2014 (UTC)