Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emeline Piggott

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. (non-admin closure) Esquivalience t 00:10, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Emeline Piggott (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

She has some mentions in sources, but not enough to meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Tagged by Bearian for notability 7 years ago. Boleyn (talk) 20:29, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 23:31, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:27, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — kikichugirl oh hello! 05:11, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:37, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per excellent work by Rhododendrites. Several of the books demonstrate significant coverage that goes far beyond trivial mentions. For the record, I'll state I looked for sources about a week ago and found none, probably because of the spelling variation. Perhaps the same thing happened to the nominator. Altamel (talk) 03:33, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. Wgolf (talk) 04:18, 11 April 2015 (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.