Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cynthia (Cindy) Todd

: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 delete. Jenks24 (talk) 03:25, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

=[[Cynthia (Cindy) Todd]]=

:{{la|Cynthia (Cindy) Todd}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Cynthia_(Cindy)_Todd Stats])

:({{Find sources|Cynthia (Cindy) Todd}})

Cynthia Todd is not notable at all. Furthermore, this article has a complete lack of verifiability since WP:IS states that a person's employer cannot be used as an independent source. NJ Wine (talk) 00:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Neutral... for now. Full of conflicts of interests (can't find sources about this person in widespread sources), likely violations of how biographies of living people must be (private life?), possible self-awareness (not that I'm accusing the subject of self-promotion), and... I don't know. However, there must be an explanation for this article. --George Ho (talk) 01:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

::I believe that the creator of the article is probably someone (e.g., student, parent) affiliated with Westlake High School. The article contains a large amount of personal and professional info about Cynthia Todd which is not available through any website that I could find. From what I've read, I'm thinking that she is a popular administrator (yearbook advisor) at the high school, and someone there decided that she deserved a Wikipedia article. I view this kind of article as a violation of Wikipedia's noble cause policy -- basically being a good person and doing good things in a community does not make a person notable. NJ Wine (talk) 02:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

:::*sigh* Why are essays policies? Nevertheless, "noble cause" must be considered. --George Ho (talk) 02:47, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

::Totally unfortunate that she has no potenetial to be known to published reliable sources. Delete. --George Ho (talk) 14:27, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Delete. Being a high school teacher/yearbook adviser is not a sign of notability. In fact, it would be difficult for a person to achieve Wikipedia-level notability in that occupation. Most likely this article was written by one of the subject's students as a tribute to their teacher, but it doesn't belong in this encyclopedia. Arguably this could be a speedy delete because I'm not even sure the article contains a claim to notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Delete verging on speedy under A7. Zero coverage in reliable sources, utterly non-notable person. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:36, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Delete As above; not notable at all. Give your teacher an apple if you like her, not a Wikipedia page. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Delete -- I thought speedy even. No coverage. Metropolitan90's argument is sound. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 13:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:39, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Delete, regretfully. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO, no coverage in independent reliable sources. A7 does not apply IMO because there is a claim to significance in the "occupations" section. →B music ian 06:05, 28 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.