Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacy Gielda

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

Non-notable, self-promoted individual -- actually a proper candidate for speedy delete mhking (talk) 01:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

• Delete no gnews hits, no evidence of WP:N. JJL (talk) 01:27, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. The article doesn't even claim much notability, other than her heading different companies and organizations. Hairhorn (talk) 02:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails wp:n Niteshift36 (talk) 05:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete No assertion of notability. Fails WP:BIO. Johnuniq (talk) 10:16, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete If we she was single, it would likely read like a personal ad

( please note my alias LOL). This bio could have been filled in from

a template.

Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 11:32, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 14:10, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. I stand by my PROD nom: "doesn't sound notable per WP:BIO, no third-party cites". Is important in several non-notable groups/companies: notability (if there were any) isn't inherited and I can't find any evidence she's done anything notable herself (in relation to these groups/companies, or in other realms). DMacks (talk) 14:42, 6 June 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.