Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carminia Ammia

: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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

=[[Carminia Ammia]]=

:{{la|Carminia Ammia}} ([{{fullurl:Carminia Ammia|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carminia Ammia}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

No real evidence of notability provided in the article. All [http://books.google.com/books?lr=&client=firefox-a&um=1&q=%22Carminia+Ammia%22&btnG=Search+Books Google book mentions] appear to be trivial in nature. ThaddeusB (talk) 20:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete Half of the brief article isn't even about her, it is about her husband, her son, and her granddaughter. Out! Brianyoumans (talk) 20:45, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- ThaddeusB (talk) 20:48, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep I added the correct source for this. She and her family are well-documented. We could likely make articles for the others as well. DGG (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

:Perhaps one article for the whole family might be more appropriate? --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

::Perhaps one article for the family, and some for the most specifically notable members, because there are some more notable than she . But as it was, she seems to have held significant municipal office. Actually reading the cited source, there seem to be at least a dozen more articles possible here. DGG (talk) 22:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep Per DGG. Mrs. Wolpoff (talk) 13:11, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep I have just created a link to this article from Carians and plan to add more when I have time. There may be an argument for extending this article to cover other members of the family, but just deleting it would IMHO weaken Wikipedia rather than strengthening it. --Chris Jefferies (talk) 13:41, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MacMed (talk) 00:47, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

:Comment: I will be more than happy to withdraw this nomination if the article is rewritten to be about the family in general (with the possibility of further articles being created about the most notable members) and moved to The Carminii of Attouda or something similar. I suppose she might be able to meet notability guidelines in her own right, but it doesn't seem like a separate article is really needed since there won't be a great deal to say about any one member of the family. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep. I think it's safe to say that people from the second century are notable per se if anything at all is known about them. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • I would like to withdraw my nomination on the basis that the content belong (at minimum) as part of a larger article. I certainly don't want valuable content deleted just because the article is poorly done. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment I hope everyone sees the humor in the fact that almost two thousand years after her death her notability is being debated. Drawn Some (talk) 22:46, 18 May 2009 (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.