Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Boulton

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. JForget 00:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Boulton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Contested prod. No references to third party sources (or any sources, for that matter) = WP:BLP violation. Claim to notability is rather flimsy. The JPS^{talk to me} 17:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete Jane Boulton, please JPS I will do anything absolutly anything for you if you just leave it and all my wiki's, including thisngs to do with Doctors, alone!

Reply soon,

Redped

xxxx.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Redped (talk • contribs) 17:58, 2 August 2009

• • Redped, could you please say why we should not delete her article. Please outline your reasons with reference to WP:N. This is not a forum, and posts like the one above will get you nowhere. The JPS^{talk to me} 18:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete another notable subject article from Redped. --Oscarthecat (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Epically fails WP:BIO and WP:a7. Would recommend Speedy Deletion, but wth. Cheers, I'^mperator 18:32, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: All that I can find is trivial mentions. Fails WP:BIO. Joe Chill (talk) 20:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Nice lady, but fleeting 'fame' only, totally non-notable subject, per reasons given above. Sky83 (talk) 19:27, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.