Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Maltman

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 delete. Star Mississippi 17:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Maltman

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. One primary ref here fails WP:GNG. Uhooep (talk) 22:49, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG. There are references available but most of them are just passing mentions. Charsaddian (talk) 07:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, Bilateral relations, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There are no independent references with in-depth coverage, so this article fails WP:GNG.
Delete Lacking indepth coverage to meet WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. For the reasons stated in the nomination. BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 02:17, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There isn’t enough coverage by reliable secondary sources to qualify as notable per WP:GNG and WP:NPERSON. Being an ambassador isn’t inherently notable. I’d expect to see more WP:SIGCOV to meet criteria. Shawn Teller (talk) 02:20, 20 February 2023 (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.