Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitzi McGilvray

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 no consensus. MBisanz ^talk 04:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mitzi McGilvray

Not notable. Article asserts only a connection with a barely notable group, but this is not enough. Google hits seem to be largely to social networking sites. Thompson Is Right (talk) 03:11, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment also the creator has been blocked indefinitely for "promotion of a company or group". Thompson Is Right (talk) 03:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - If TikGames is a "barely notable group", why do they have an article? And if they are not, isn't being one of their VPs notable? Proxy User (talk) 17:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I would think the Chair Emeritus thing has something to do with that. MuZemike 17:11, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, the existence or nonexistence of another article has no bearing on the this article. -- Jelly Soup (talk) 22:49, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep — some mention of her appointment as Chair Emeritus of the IGDA [1]. She is also listed by Edge magazine as the video game industry's top 100 most influential women [2]. She is also briefly mentioned in other major outlets such as CNET [3]. However, I do acknowedge that the sources I mentioned could be more comprehensive as far as coverage is concerned, but I think she establishes at least a bare minimum amount of notability. MuZemike 17:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails inclusion criteria as per WP:NOTE. No reliable sources.--Sloane (talk) 04:28, 10 March 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.