Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary DeMoss (3rd nomination)

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. consensus seems clear enough DGG ( talk ) 08:28, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mary DeMoss

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

Fails WP:BIO. Not a notable person. The parochial sources are not discussing her as a person and so this article should be deleted. jps (talk) 17:24, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:BIO. Not a notable person Govindaharihari (talk) 21:35, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:BIO as it always has done. ukexpat (talk) 14:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails to show any notability , thus fails WP:BIO KoshVorlon 18:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 08:27, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 08:27, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the article certainly looks acceptable at first but with further inspection, my searches found nothing at all. Notifying past AfD commenter David Gerard. SwisterTwister talk 08:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to International Foundation for Human Rights and Tolerance - David Gerard (talk) 08:32, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I hadn't thought of that, although I have to say that article certainly seems troubled as well. SwisterTwister talk 08:42, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that the IFHRT exists anymore and it probably never did (it may have always been just a convenient legal fiction/propaganda piece). We might consider deleting/merging that article too. Maybe to the Citizens Commission on Human Rights which actually is more than a shell corporation. jps (talk) 13:16, 25 November 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.