Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leah Rogers

: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. J04n(talk page) 16:21, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

=[[Leah Rogers]]=

:{{la|Leah Rogers}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Leah_Rogers Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Leah Rogers}})

Subject of the article fails WP:GNG. In addition, it contain unsourced contents that seemed libelous and defamatory. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 19:29, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:42, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete The purported book title had no google hits beyond Wikipedia and Youtube. I blanked all the unsourced BLP material. If it is demonstrated that she is in fact someone who is making her story public and for which there are reliable sources, I'd be willing to change this !vote. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 21:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Non-notable person per WP:BIO. --Drm310 (talk) 22:18, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Lacks significant coverage - the only source I've found covering her is KPHO, and, according to the article, the basis of her notability is her being covered by said source. Lots of people tell their stories on the news, but that doesn't make them notable. She needs to have had additional coverage at the very minimum. Upjav (talk) 22:15, 11 March 2015 (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.