510:
and say its true. The fact that someone can find nothing wrong with the page doesn't mean there still aren't problems or that it actually is notable. This isn't a campaign or political issue so much as a wikipedia issue. As I've said I'm all for deleting the Obama girl too. One bad article does not justify another. The comment from the talk page was already posted here by that user although they did not sign so no need to repeat it. I've striked it out and the fact that it was posted by two different people in the same exact words is suspect. --
274:
doesn't show her as being covered over any significant amount of time. At best she is a human interest piece, and should he not receive the nomination, this page will read more like a resume and most likely fall into neglect. Isn't there a better place for her than her own article? Perhaps his campaign page? If she's not significant enough to be included there then I don't see how she's somebody that should be included in an encyclopedia.--
509:
The sources provided still do not establish her notability as lasting and not temporary. One of the comments justified keeping it based on the notability within the grassroots campaign. This does not establish notability as it is word of mouth and still temporary, even though I'll assume good faith
273:
Her being mentioned on the USA Today blog is all well and good, but it's just another blog. You cannot say that one blog is more valid as a source than another, and in this context, they have been said to be invalid as a source. Your other source provides coverage by journalists, but it really
146:
This is certainly notable enough. If you don't like the page, argue with
Knowledge (XXG) standards for notability, which favour cartoons, video games and other pop culture items with a low bar for passing the screen. Per present standards this is a keeper.
491:
comment was found on the article talk page and I am transferring it here for completeness. "The Ron Paul girl should stay. She's an icon now and anyone within the Ron Paul
Grassroots campaign knows about her." (note this unsigned comment posted by
260:
Coverage has been picked up by CNN and Fox News. This is a very new phenom. Give it time to develope. Over 250,000 people have watched one of the videos. It has become a part of the 08 U.S. presidential campaign, like it or not.
477:. These commentors saw the page when the notable sources were added. Thus the later commentors should be given very serious weight since they saw the poperly sourced version of the article.
114:
445:
The Ron Paul girl should stay. She's an icon now and anyone within the Ron Paul
Grassroots campaign knows about her. I find nothing from the rules of deletion to be applied here.
156:
Since when are
Metacafe and Blogspot reliable sources, let alone third-party ones? As it stands, this article doesn't just miss the bar, it whangs it's head on it. --
359:
Why are we trying to delete the article on the Ron Paul Girl? The Barack Obama girl has not one, but two articles about her and no one's marked them for deletion.
248:
due to lack of reliable sources and non-noteable. However, the situation could change if this publicity campaign gets covered by the mainstream press.
121:
Subject fails to meet notability guidelines. Page reads like advertisement and was created by a user whose only contributions have been to this page.
416:
134:
for being a misleading article about Ron Paul's campaign videos and being utterly bereft of any factual info on the subject at hand.
17:
376:
347:
and waiting for the AfD appearence of Chris Dodd Girl, Mike
Huckabee Lass, Dennis Kucinich Woman and Female Fred Thompson Supporter
87:
82:
91:
165:
Check out the current article sources which include coverage by CNN, Fox News, the Paul
Campaign website, USA Today and others.
74:
555:
36:
460:
554:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
290:'s article, but merging all this material into Ron Paul would give the Ron Paul Girl coverage undue weight in
420:
181:: Unless references (other than metacafe and blogspot) to verify notability can be added to the article. --
448:
412:
372:
537:
514:
501:
481:
464:
437:
424:
397:
384:
351:
333:
313:
298:
278:
265:
252:
240:
213:
197:
185:
169:
160:
151:
138:
125:
56:
380:
78:
330:
456:
493:
70:
62:
135:
452:
294:. By the way, since when is the length of time of media coverage a criterion for notability?
210:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
348:
249:
409:
Why are we trying to get rid of the Ron Paul Girl? There's nothing wrong with this page.
498:
478:
295:
262:
166:
148:
222:
157:
206:
532:
526:
511:
434:
394:
310:
275:
122:
182:
108:
524:
this is not a biography, it's a "wow, hot!" fan piece about the campaign tactic.
50:
362:
473:
Interesting to note that the comments after Nov 12 23:30 strongly favour
433:
Notable on the web. Shown on Fox. Republican version the the Obama Girl.
291:
287:
194:
307:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Notability#Notability_is_not_temporary
306:
367:
548:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
393:
Then Mark them for deletion. I simply stumbled upon this one.--
193:
lack of news coverage; effectively an ad for the actress/site.
221:
not encyclopedic, no reliable sources, borderline advert.
104:
100:
96:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
363:http://en.wikipedia.org/I_Got_a_Crush..._on_Obama
558:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
209:sources, and does not appear to be notable.
368:http://en.wikipedia.org/Amber_Lee_Ettinger
341:Per present standards this is a keeper.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
329:but improve the article's quality.
286:The Ron Paul Girl is mentioned in
24:
1:
538:10:37, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
515:19:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
502:15:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
482:15:04, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
465:04:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
438:02:56, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
425:02:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
398:00:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
385:20:58, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
352:07:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
334:23:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
314:05:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
299:03:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
279:03:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
266:23:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
253:17:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
241:14:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
214:13:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
198:13:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
186:05:38, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
170:01:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
161:08:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
152:05:26, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
139:03:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
126:00:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
57:03:30, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
575:
551:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
536:
467:
451:comment added by
427:
415:comment added by
387:
375:comment added by
566:
553:
530:
446:
410:
370:
238:
235:
232:
229:
112:
94:
53:
34:
574:
573:
569:
568:
567:
565:
564:
563:
562:
556:deletion review
549:
236:
233:
230:
227:
85:
69:
66:
51:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
572:
570:
561:
560:
543:
541:
540:
519:
518:
517:
487:The following
484:
468:
440:
428:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
365:
360:
342:
336:
324:
323:
322:
321:
320:
319:
318:
317:
316:
243:
223:Andrew Lenahan
216:
200:
188:
176:
175:
174:
173:
172:
141:
119:
118:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
571:
559:
557:
552:
546:
545:
544:
539:
534:
529:
528:
523:
520:
516:
513:
508:
505:
504:
503:
500:
497:
495:
494:User:Vitacore
490:
485:
483:
480:
476:
472:
469:
466:
462:
458:
454:
450:
444:
441:
439:
436:
432:
429:
426:
422:
418:
417:66.25.184.142
414:
408:
405:
399:
396:
392:
389:
388:
386:
382:
378:
374:
369:
366:
364:
361:
358:
355:
354:
353:
350:
346:
343:
340:
337:
335:
332:
328:
325:
315:
312:
308:
305:
302:
301:
300:
297:
293:
289:
285:
282:
281:
280:
277:
272:
269:
268:
267:
264:
259:
256:
255:
254:
251:
247:
244:
242:
239:
224:
220:
217:
215:
212:
208:
205:as it has no
204:
201:
199:
196:
192:
189:
187:
184:
180:
177:
171:
168:
164:
163:
162:
159:
155:
154:
153:
150:
145:
142:
140:
137:
136:Eddie.willers
133:
130:
129:
128:
127:
124:
116:
110:
106:
102:
98:
93:
89:
84:
80:
76:
72:
71:Ron Paul Girl
68:
67:
64:
63:Ron Paul Girl
61:
59:
58:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
550:
547:
542:
525:
521:
506:
488:
486:
474:
470:
442:
430:
406:
390:
356:
344:
338:
331:12.10.248.51
326:
303:
283:
270:
257:
245:
226:
218:
211:TonyBallioni
202:
190:
178:
143:
131:
120:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
447:—Preceding
411:—Preceding
377:24.14.76.94
371:—Preceding
349:Doc Strange
250:Majoreditor
246:Weak Delete
499:Decoratrix
479:Decoratrix
296:Decoratrix
263:Decoratrix
207:verifiable
167:Decoratrix
149:Decoratrix
158:UsaSatsui
512:Chadamir
507:Response
461:contribs
449:unsigned
435:Medtopic
413:unsigned
395:Chadamir
391:Response
373:unsigned
311:Chadamir
304:Response
292:Ron Paul
288:Ron Paul
284:Response
276:Chadamir
123:Chadamir
115:View log
475:keeping
471:Comment
357:Comment
271:Comment
258:Comment
183:Rjd0060
88:protect
83:history
522:Delete
345:Delete
219:Delete
203:Delete
191:Delete
179:Delete
132:Delete
92:delete
52:Kurykh
46:delete
533:Help!
453:Frasu
443:Keep.
431:Keep.
109:views
101:watch
97:links
16:<
489:Keep
457:talk
421:talk
407:Keep
381:talk
339:Keep
327:Keep
144:Keep
105:logs
79:talk
75:edit
527:Guy
234:bli
195:JJL
113:– (
463:)
459:•
423:)
383:)
309:--
237:nd
231:ar
228:St
225:-
107:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
81:|
77:|
48:.
535:)
531:(
496:}
455:(
419:(
379:(
117:)
111:)
73:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.