Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bisa Williams

: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The result was Withdrawn nomination. My76Strat (talk) 06:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

=[[Bisa Williams]]=

:{{la|Bisa Williams}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bisa_Williams Stats])

:({{Find sources|Bisa Williams}})

~~Does not pass WP:DIPLOMAT, has not yet been significantly involved in discussions or negotiations of historical importance. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:19, 28 May 2012 (UTC)~~

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:54, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

And what about the general notability guideline? If she meets that then WP:DIPLOMAT is irrelevant. Phil Bridger (talk) 15:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

:*The GNG is a presumption of notability, not proof of it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

::*And that is a complete non sequitur. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Strong keep - The general standard is that a subject need to meet the general notability guideline OR the subject specific guidelines. The subject specific guidelines are not an extra requirement. In fact, it works the other way round in that meeting the additional guideline means a subject is likely but not necessarily going to be notable. WP:BIO clearly states "failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included". Since Williams clearly meet WP:GNG, there is no need for her to meet WP:DIPLOMAT. -- KTC (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Keep – Unequivocally passes GNG, as Phil and KTC said above, WP:DIPLOMAT is irrelevant here. — Bill william compton^Talk 18:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Keep. The subject does, in fact, meet WP:DIPLOMAT as well as WP:GNG, with her discussions in Cuba clearly being of historical importance. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:59, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
Withdraw per KTC. Good point, my mistake. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:32, 3 June 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.