Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eve Akerman

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. — Aitias // discussion 11:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eve Akerman

Ghits reflect her work, but not the notability of same. She has done some columns and reviews, but no evidence she's notable for her work. Also, the fact that her child is notable does not ensure that she is. StarM 21:49, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —StarM 21:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article says she is best known as the mother of someone. No notability asserted for herself. Redddogg (talk) 21:56, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--practically qualifies for a speedy. Drmies (talk) 01:31, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, although with a heavy heart. I suspect that the subject is clearly notable and copious (offline) sources could be found to support this, if anyone was interested. The claim to be best known as someone's mother has the ring of being written by a man! I strongly suspect there is plenty more to say about the subject. However, I do not have the time and interest to perform a rescue job and I suspect nor will anyone else. Given that suspicion, rather than proof, is all I have to support my claim to the subject's notability plus the fact that the article is little more than two unreferenced sentences, deletion (as original research if nothing else) is probably the best course of action at this stage. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 03:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - per Mattinbgn I suspect that she is sufficiently notable but there is little online beyond this biography. - Peripitus (Talk) 05:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Devoid of references, no notability evident. WWGB (talk) 07:44, 21 January 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.