Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glendy B. Arnold

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 no consensus, default to keep. I considered relisting this one, but it's been running for two weeks, and it's not like there's much ongoing discussion. Steve Smith (talk) 03:36, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Glendy B. Arnold

[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)

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage to show that she meets

WP:NPOL. Was de-prodded with the comment, "There is an incoming link to this page", which doesn't seem to be a valid rationale to disapprove a prod. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:57, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete per nom. Daask (talk) 19:17, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Plenty of fodder for a more extensive article about this gentleman at https://www.newspapers.com/search/#query=%22Glendy+B.+Arnold%22&offset=2. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 00:17, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~::It is marked as a stub. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 00:24, 5 June 2018 (UTC)~~[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:00, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:00, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 09:00, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Numerous sources have been added since the article was nominated for AfD. These should be contemplated in the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:53, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete None of the offices held by the subject are sufficient to meet automatic notability for
significant. PohranicniStraze (talk) 17:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

A three-column article, with illustrations, in a major metropolitan newspaper is not routine. Thanks. https://www.newspapers.com/image/138159868/?terms=%22Glendy%2BB.%2BArnold%22%2Bmarguerite%2Bmartyn. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Well enough sourced to pass GNG. Historical biography of an American judge. Carrite (talk) 13:24, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It would be reassuring to know that the nominator put enough effort into WP:BEFORE to actually get the gender of the subject right. Carrite (talk) 13:27, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - was not aware that gender was an aspect of either
WP:BEFORE… or perhaps it was a simple type. Nice AGF. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:13, 18 June 2018 (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.