Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trisha Hershberger

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. (Keep for Meg Turney / Delete for Trisha Hershberger) j⚛e decker ^talk 14:24, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trisha Hershberger

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

Tagged as CSDA7 when the contested deletion blurb noted an additional article in the same ballpark: Meg Turney. I figure to list them both for deletion on grounds of a lack of apparent significance and notability. TomStar81 (Talk) 10:42, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 16:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 16:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for Meg Turney / Delete for Trisha Hershberger (at least for now): Pretty much this quote from the person who contest TH's deletion Trisha is popular and relevant enough to have a Wikipedia page. Her former co-host, Meg Turney has a Wikipedia page and has far less accomplishments than Trisha is invalid at least in regards to this Meg Turney article. It goes against this Wikipedia policy. Either way it's weird how Meg Turney has a Wikipedia page and has far less accomplishments than Trisha. can invoke someone to say that the Meg Turney article is in the same ballpark. Did the person who nommed Turney's article for deletion even realize that there are 20 references for Turney, hardly in the same ballpark as the 0 references on Hershberger's article. Yes, I'm aware that some of those 20 might be removed, but from a person whose made an article for Hershberger before and failed before, I can tell you from experience it was easier to find references for Turney than it was for Hershberger. So, obviously now the Hershberger article should be deleted because it has 0 references, but on the other hand that can obviously be improved upon. Soulbust (talk) 03:28, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meg Turney / Delete Trisha Hershberger While some of the Sources used in the Meg Turney article are questionable there are many more that meet the wp:rs standard.--Dcheagle • talk • contribs 03:51, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for Meg Turney / Delete for Trisha Hershberger Seriously, these pages may be related, but in no way are they similar, Meg has independent sourses where as Trisha has none. Why is there even a comparison?--Ditto51 (My Talk Page) 12:24, 4 February 2015 (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.