Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edie Britt (spiritual adviser)

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 of the debate was Delete. I'm not going to userfy this because EdieBritt already has a user page. If she wants me to just cut and append this article into her user page, I'll be pleased to do so. Edie, please let me know if you want this content copied to your user page. Deathphoenix ʕ 14:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edie Britt (spiritual adviser)

Completing a nomination by someone else. See talk page for information. - Liberatore(T) 16:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

• • Not strictly true (the "completing a nomination" part). See my comment below. Grutness...wha?

    This article was indeed nominated by someone else (not you) [1], but the nominator did't perform steps 2 and 3. Sorry for giving the impression that the nominator was the same person posting on the talk page. - Liberatore(T) 11:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

    • my bad; my apologies. Grutness...wha? 01:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
• The author, User:EdieBritt, has been politely and thoroughly explained why this article in unsuitable as it stands. She appears to have been encouraged to do so by somebody, so that and an understandable lack of knowledge of WP:AUTO as a newly arrived editor convince me this is just a misunderstanding. Yet, the only solution atm is to delete it. Phædriel ♥ tell me - 16:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, no explanation of notability. NawlinWiki 17:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Nawlin ~ trialsanderrors 18:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
• Userfy. It was me who split this page out of the Edie Britt article, and if this is deleted the same spamming will no doubt start up there again. This information is exactly the sort of thing that might appear on a user's user page, and if it's a direct choice between userfying this and having someone eventually banned as a page vandal, I think I know which would be the happier solution for all concerned. And no, Paolo, you weren't "completing the nomination for someone else" - I never nominated it. My edit summary comment simply indicated that I felt that it wasn't long before someone else would consider it worthy of deletion. (see above) Grutness...wha? 07:44, 15 June 2006 (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.