Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosario Isasi

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 of the debate was Copyright violation, listed on the Copyright problems page. User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rosario Isasi

Tagged as repost but previous deletion was speedy, not through AfD as far as I can tell. The previous deletion comment indicates amusement. Seems to be copy & paste from [1] (not commercial so not speedy copyvio material), scores <500 Ghits and appears to be promotion of a non-notable individual in support of the agenda she espouses. Just zis Guy you know? 13:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - A copyvio is a copyvio, no matter where it comes from. - Andre Engels 15:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. --Ed (Edgar181) 15:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP. The Rosario Isasi article was unfairly deleted. Beyond the fact that her bio speaks for itself in regards to how notable she is, Isasi is mentioned in the Bioconservatism and Transhumanism article. I therefore recreated the article. Since I disagree with her views and positions, this article is not meant to promote her agenda but explain it out of fairness. I'll edit the article to eliminate the copyvio.--Loremaster 19:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn --Icarus 19:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Commercial site or not, if it's a copyvio, which this is, it needs to be listed on the Copyright problems page. I have done so, thus rendering this listing moot.

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.

Rosario Isasi (renomination)

This article was deleted before and the current form comes from the recreated text. The person in question does not have enought publications to be notable. (I can't find the criteria at hand, please post here). I think it should be speedy deleted and protected. It is also possible vanity. Tony Bruguier 01:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. *sigh* I don't see why people are so obsessed with deleting this poor little article. Like I said before, beyond the fact that her bio speaks for itself in regards to how notable she is, Isasi is mentioned in the Bioconservatism and Transhumanism articles. --Loremaster 02:27, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]