Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/Lauren Fagan - Knowledge

Source 📝

342:. It was the wrong call to not delete this article under A7 which doesn't make a credible encyclopedic claim. It's perfectly valid to seek community consensus to overturn a bad decision made by an editor who ignored A7 policy. If you want the encyclopedia to keep this article than I suggest you edit the article to meet a basic level of encyclopedic competence so A7 isn't valid. Otherwise, we don't keep articles on 299:
deletion rationale. The article still fails to make a credible encyclopedic claim in its current state and should be deleted under A7. SPEEDY is cleanup for articles that don’t meet a basic level of stub competency. Please read A7 which specifically excludes notability as a relevant issue. Yes
269:
before an AfD nom. Fagan was a student in 2016, some eight years ago. She is now a successful soprano. For example, she sang Musetta in La bohème at Covent Garden earlier this year. A simple search of Google News turns up plenty of results. AfD is not clean-up.
509:. We either follow deletion policy or we don't. It's that simple. If editors are finding encyclopedic achievements not currently in the article text please add a sentence or two to the article so that A7 is no longer an issue. 162: 416:
and actually look at A7 policy objectively. You can't seriously be telling me that an article telling us someone went to a music school and got into a training program for opera singers is encyclopedic.
218: 119: 226: 156: 222: 66: 51: 214: 318:
Your CSD nom was declined. AfD is not for relitigating declined CSDs. Different criteria apply at AfD. You need to make a different argument.
577: 247: 450: 92: 87: 96: 46: 39: 17: 394:
policy gets used at AFD with some frequency. It's not like this is an out of the norm conversation. Not all AFDs involve just
527: 530: 177: 505:
as policy. If the current in article text remains unaltered and we close this as keep, this will be a prime candidate fro
79: 144: 456: 197:
but it was oddly declined. Being a student and in a program that trains opera singers does not make one encyclopedic.
123: 60: 56: 506: 364:
If you think it "was the wrong call to not delete this article under A7", then why have you not raised this at
449:: Seems more than just a student. There are roles in major notable productions, as well as sources like these 138: 470: 452: 335: 134: 562: 541: 518: 489: 460: 425: 407: 377: 359: 327: 309: 279: 252: 242: 206: 346:
that don't make a credible claim of encyclopedic importance no matter how many sources we find because
582: 365: 347: 412:
On a side note, the tone of the comments here is overly terse and accusatory. You might want to try
184: 537: 383: 339: 170: 549:- although I would greatly prefer that someone add the sources found and explain in context - per 558: 514: 485: 421: 403: 373: 355: 323: 305: 275: 202: 83: 35: 391: 292: 266: 231: 193:
Article makes no claim to encyclopedic importance. It should have been speedy deleted per
150: 533: 386:
process when there is a difference of opinions. That's wikipedia community policy, and
571: 550: 413: 387: 343: 296: 476:
has to do with in article text. Not what is outside the article. Please engage with
554: 510: 502: 481: 477: 473: 417: 399: 369: 351: 319: 315: 301: 289: 271: 262: 198: 194: 75: 27: 113: 395: 265:, but as a long-term editor, one would expect you to at least follow 553:. I am an opera queen, but I’m not familiar with the subject. 501:. It seems like none of the keep voters are engaging with 532:, but I'm unsure. European opera isn't in my wheelhouse. 109: 105: 101: 169: 390:is the community forum to discuss deletions. FYI 213:Note: This discussion has been included in the 382:That should be obvious. It's better to use the 338:and a subversion of both deletion policy and 183: 8: 67:Help, my article got nominated for deletion! 212: 350:is not relevant under A7 which is policy. 300:notable topics can get deleted under A7. 526:: I think these are about this person 7: 24: 217:lists for the following topics: 52:Introduction to deletion process 368:? It was their call, not mine. 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 563:01:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC) 542:00:43, 21 September 2024 (UTC) 519:14:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 490:14:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 461:14:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 426:14:22, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 408:14:11, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 378:14:06, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 360:13:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 328:13:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 310:13:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 280:09:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 253:05:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 207:02:55, 20 September 2024 (UTC) 1: 42:(AfD)? Read these primers! 599: 578:AfD debates (Biographical) 124:edits since nomination 334:No. That argument is 40:Articles for deletion 366:User talk:asilvering 295:is different than a 219:Bands and musicians 471:TheJoyfulTentmaker 453:TheJoyfulTentmaker 507:WP:DELETIONREVIEW 255: 57:Guide to deletion 47:How to contribute 590: 480:policy language. 336:WP:WIKILAWYERING 250: 245: 238: 234: 215:deletion sorting 188: 187: 173: 117: 99: 37: 598: 597: 593: 592: 591: 589: 588: 587: 568: 567: 248: 243: 236: 232: 130: 90: 74: 71: 34: 31: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 596: 594: 586: 585: 580: 570: 569: 566: 565: 544: 521: 495: 494: 493: 492: 464: 463: 443: 442: 441: 440: 439: 438: 437: 436: 435: 434: 433: 432: 431: 430: 429: 428: 283: 282: 256: 191: 190: 127: 70: 69: 64: 54: 49: 32: 30: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 595: 584: 581: 579: 576: 575: 573: 564: 560: 556: 552: 548: 545: 543: 539: 535: 531: 528: 525: 522: 520: 516: 512: 508: 504: 500: 497: 496: 491: 487: 483: 479: 475: 472: 468: 467: 466: 465: 462: 458: 454: 451: 448: 445: 444: 427: 423: 419: 415: 411: 410: 409: 405: 401: 397: 393: 389: 385: 381: 380: 379: 375: 371: 367: 363: 362: 361: 357: 353: 349: 348:WP:Notability 345: 341: 337: 333: 332: 331: 330: 329: 325: 321: 317: 313: 312: 311: 307: 303: 298: 294: 291: 287: 286: 285: 284: 281: 277: 273: 268: 264: 260: 257: 254: 251: 246: 241: 240: 239: 228: 224: 220: 216: 211: 210: 209: 208: 204: 200: 196: 186: 182: 179: 176: 172: 168: 164: 161: 158: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 136: 133: 132:Find sources: 128: 125: 121: 115: 111: 107: 103: 98: 94: 89: 85: 81: 77: 73: 72: 68: 65: 62: 58: 55: 53: 50: 48: 45: 44: 43: 41: 36: 29: 26: 19: 546: 523: 498: 446: 384:WP:CONSENSUS 340:WP:CONSENSUS 258: 235: 230: 192: 180: 174: 166: 159: 153: 147: 141: 131: 76:Lauren Fagan 33: 28:Lauren Fagan 583:AfD debates 261:Thank you, 157:free images 572:Categories 534:Oaktree b 392:WP:SPEEDY 293:WP:SPEEDY 267:WP:BEFORE 237:Quidditch 227:Australia 120:View log 61:glossary 555:Bearian 524:Comment 511:4meter4 499:Comment 482:4meter4 418:4meter4 400:4meter4 398:. Best. 370:Edwardx 352:4meter4 344:WP:BLPs 320:Edwardx 316:4meter4 302:4meter4 290:Edwardx 272:Edwardx 263:4meter4 225:, and 199:4meter4 163:WP refs 151:scholar 93:protect 88:history 38:New to 551:WP:HEY 414:WP:AGF 388:WP:AFD 297:WP:GNG 135:Google 97:delete 503:WP:A7 478:WP:A7 474:WP:A7 223:Women 195:WP:A7 178:JSTOR 139:books 114:views 106:watch 102:links 16:< 559:talk 547:Keep 538:talk 515:talk 486:talk 457:talk 447:Keep 422:talk 404:talk 396:WP:N 374:talk 356:talk 324:talk 306:talk 276:talk 259:Keep 203:talk 171:FENS 145:news 110:logs 84:talk 80:edit 185:TWL 118:– ( 574:: 561:) 540:) 529:, 517:) 488:) 459:) 424:) 406:) 376:) 358:) 326:) 308:) 278:) 233:WC 229:. 221:, 205:) 165:) 122:| 112:| 108:| 104:| 100:| 95:| 91:| 86:| 82:| 557:( 536:( 513:( 484:( 469:@ 455:( 420:( 402:( 372:( 354:( 322:( 314:@ 304:( 288:@ 274:( 249:✎ 244:☎ 201:( 189:) 181:· 175:· 167:· 160:· 154:· 148:· 142:· 137:( 129:( 126:) 116:) 78:( 63:) 59:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
Lauren Fagan

Articles for deletion
How to contribute
Introduction to deletion process
Guide to deletion
glossary
Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
Lauren Fagan
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
edits since nomination
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.