Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Lichtenstein
This seems to be a personal ad and it is not encylopedia-worthy. freestylefrappe 04:38, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
This nomination was begun but stp 3 not completed. I am finishing the listing now.RJFJR 02:32, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
This is a valid encyclopedia-worthy page. Encyclopedias often contain biographical and other information about artists and writers of note. Any biographical entry in this encyclopedia could be deemed a personal ad, if the same criteria were used. This page is not very developed yet, but it shouldn't be deleted just because of a lack of information as of yet. It is a fair argument to say that the information about this person is just as valid as any other person in Wikipedia. If there had been an internet during Vincent Van Gogh's time, and someone tried to enter him in wikipedia, I'm sure there would have been someone else who considered his entry a personal ad and voted to have him removed, since he was not all that famous or popular while still alive. --lichtentunes 3:41 June 7, 2005
- Comment: Are you any of the persons in question?, ie Thomas, Lisa or Laur? If so, I do not understand why you refer to yourself in the above comment as `this person`. It seems all this effort, both by you, and everyone voting here (who also spends a lot of groundwork before voting, like verification etc) could have been solved if you could state such. Cause, if you are, the 2+1 articles could easily be moved to your Uer area where it belongs. -Snorre/Antwelm 08:01, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Userfy to User:Lichtentunes. I don't see how this person is notable in her own right. She's working on an unpublished book. Her main claim to fame seems to be that her brother is famous. --Xcali 03:21, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Userfy and/or delete. It's not very notable for the above reason, the book is not published and the wikipedia isn't a crystal ball, blah blah. Deletion also on the reasons of advertising/self-promotion, and the Wikipedia not being a place for advertising. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 03:50, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Userfy or delete. "I'm sure there would have been someone else who considered his entry a personal ad and voted to have him removed, since he was not all that famous or popular while still alive." And that would have been the correct decision at that time. Wikipedia does not include people on the off-chance of future notability. It also seems we have a whole family of vanity articles here, including Laur Lichtenstein. I would consider the brother's entry (Thomas Howard Lichtenstein) borderline. --Tabor 04:13, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Userfy. JamesBurns 07:54, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Userfy/Delete vanity. She's not notable yet. And if that changes someone else should write it, obviously. --Etacar11 15:02, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)