- 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. Wizardman 17:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Laura De Castro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
No obvious claim to notability - unless the Federation of College Democrats is a major organisation. No references given, no sources cited, speculative comments made. No substantive edits made other than by the author. Personally, I can't see any reason to keep this article. CultureDrone (talk) 13:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete per nom unless notability is properly demonstrated. Federation of College Democrats does not have an article so I'll assume non-notability.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 13:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per all above. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Jonathan (talk • contribs • complain?) 16:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, but allow for re-creation if she gets elected president of the College Democrats in 2008. Bearian'sBooties (talk) 22:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Being an officer in a state federation of the college division of a political party is not an inherent claim to notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 00:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - no notability. -FrankTobia (talk) 20:59, 3 January 2008 (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.