Talk:Rebecca Cardon
Latest comment: 1 month ago by 2607:F2C0:EC94:38C0:9C93:498A:5567:5B77 in topic Notability
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 5 January 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This article was nominated for deletion on Sept 28th 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Copyvio edit
I was granted premission from www.rebeccacardon.net to use the text.
- Ok, I'll remove the Speedy on this. Nevertheless, Ms. Cardon does not seem all that notable. I mean most people don't make it into the encyclopedia for teaching spinning in a gym. And while I have no doubt that she is "healthy and fit", lines like:
- She attributes this to her mother, who would fill her bottle with fresh juiced carrots before juicing was cool
- are not exactly the normal tone for an encyclopedia article. --JJay 20:51, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Talk page edit
Please do not remove talk pages to articles. They are part of the public record. Remember this is not a homepage. Anyone can edit this article. --JJay 20:27, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Inappropriate pictures edit
I'm of the opinion that the two pictures that show Ms. Cardon with her pants pulled down are inappropriate. What do they contribute to the article? Joyous (talk) 22:59, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- I agree with you. The pictures should go. I had put a speedy delete but the author claimed permission. The article as it stands is a probable candidate for afd. If it stays, would like to see a citation on the bench press world record though. Also see my comments above --JJay 00:04, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Notability edit
Being on a reality TV show does not constitute notability. I question the advisability of this article until notability has been established. Softlavender (talk) 12:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- The article had been nominated for deletion in 2006. The article doesn't meet the current criteria for notability, see wp:notability (people) and the specific criteria for entertainers, wp:ent. It becomes hard to argue the article is anything but self-promotional when the subject isn't notable. Is it conceivable that the article could be edited to comply? I have proposed deletion of the article. 842U (talk) 14:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- Notability per the subject meeting WP:GNG for 18 years of media coverage beginning in 1992 and, in the subject also meeting WP:ENT through having significant roles in notable productions is now being considered at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Cardon (2nd nomination). There is absolutely no evidence that the 2005 author of the article was the subject hrself, so a claim of this article being "self-promotional", specially after innumerable edits by dozens of established editors over 5 years, seems at best to be incorrect. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:30, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
- Dear editors,
- This person still seems to be promoting themselves, rather than anybody who's notable enough for Wikipedia.
- The only reason I found this page is because her phone number is one digit different from mine and I keep her calls! Wikipedia doesn't need a page for every single smalltimer who ever appeared on a reality show, IMDB exists.
- Please reconsider deleting it 2607:F2C0:EC94:38C0:9C93:498A:5567:5B77 (talk) 17:33, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Notability per the subject meeting WP:GNG for 18 years of media coverage beginning in 1992 and, in the subject also meeting WP:ENT through having significant roles in notable productions is now being considered at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Cardon (2nd nomination). There is absolutely no evidence that the 2005 author of the article was the subject hrself, so a claim of this article being "self-promotional", specially after innumerable edits by dozens of established editors over 5 years, seems at best to be incorrect. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 20:30, 11 January 2011 (UTC)