Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
→‎Susan Lindauer: more like no profile
Line 11: Line 11:
::That might solve things, however I'm afraid we would have the same sort of editor delirium occurring at that article as we have at this one; that Lindauder was working undercover for the USGOVT as an agent for peace. [[User:Two kinds of pork|Two kinds of pork]] ([[User talk:Two kinds of pork|talk]]) 20:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
::That might solve things, however I'm afraid we would have the same sort of editor delirium occurring at that article as we have at this one; that Lindauder was working undercover for the USGOVT as an agent for peace. [[User:Two kinds of pork|Two kinds of pork]] ([[User talk:Two kinds of pork|talk]]) 20:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Deletion per [[WP:BLP1E]] requires that three specified conditions be met. In this instance, #2 is not met. [[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]] ([[User talk:Nomoskedasticity|talk]]) 14:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. Deletion per [[WP:BLP1E]] requires that three specified conditions be met. In this instance, #2 is not met. [[User:Nomoskedasticity|Nomoskedasticity]] ([[User talk:Nomoskedasticity|talk]]) 14:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
::I disagree. #2 is quite satisfied. Lindauer, is extremely likely to remain a low profile individual. Considering the circumstances, any serious source will be unlikely to give her any coverage. [[User:Two kinds of pork|Two kinds of pork]] ([[User talk:Two kinds of pork|talk]]) 14:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:30, 26 August 2014

Susan Lindauer

Susan Lindauer (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)

This BLP subject is notable only for her arrest. While it attracted some attention in RS, it is still just a BLP1E. There are some issues with the article's editing history that suggest the subject or someone close to the subject may be editing the article to push a different narrative than how the article currently reads. Since it is "one event" I suggest we IAR and delete Two kinds of pork (talk) 05:43, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Without wishing to comment on the general notability of Susan Lindauer, this use of the Patriot Act certainly is notable and so if it is decided to delete this article I'd like to suggest the full contents be included in the Patriot Act article which currently references it under "Controversies". While understanding that there is a heated debate over the facts and that her notability or otherwise is inextricable from this debate, I certainly found it interesting and informative. Right-Wing Hippy (talk) 20:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That might solve things, however I'm afraid we would have the same sort of editor delirium occurring at that article as we have at this one; that Lindauder was working undercover for the USGOVT as an agent for peace. Two kinds of pork (talk) 20:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Deletion per WP:BLP1E requires that three specified conditions be met. In this instance, #2 is not met. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. #2 is quite satisfied. Lindauer, is extremely likely to remain a low profile individual. Considering the circumstances, any serious source will be unlikely to give her any coverage. Two kinds of pork (talk) 14:30, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply