Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanna Bonta: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:41, 18 October 2007

Vanna_Bonta

This seems to be mostly written by Bonta herself, and is does not meet the relevant notability guidline. VZG 05:15, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Her IMDb acting credits are very minor, her book isn't exactly highly rated on amazon.com , and the poetry doesn't seem especially noticed. Clarityfiend 06:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sufficiently non-notable. Kevin 06:43, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Changing my vote to reflect the harrassment I had just had to endure from Tikka72 . Hopefully the harassment will stop now. Kevin 10:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This looks like vandalism. Vampire Zombie Girl you havin a bad night? heheh I love Bonta as a favorite since I was a kid in The Beastmaster. Why don't you guys go harass Chris Crocker or something LOL. I have contributed to this entry and looks like a lot of sources have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tikka72 (talk • contribs) 08:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Agreed this delete request is nonsense. This Wiki article is a compilation of news sources, efforts by a lot of people, newspapers, and cultural resources. If people want to read what Vanna Bonta writes about herself they can go to her MySpace page where she really does write about herself. I object. Do not delete Vanna Bonta --- it is self evident why, per the facts why she is notable. Track these users deletion request and you'll find out why they are vandalizing. Will check out their "notable" contributions to Wiki.Ribofizz 09:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~OBJECTION Don't Delete.~~ acting credits consistent for years, novels, prize winning poetry, artist model for historic monuments. She has been very noticed and is obviously notableRibofizz 10:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Only vote once please. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Do Not delete.~~ check out Clarity fiend and these users -- they have personal problems with some personalities.Ribofizz
- Only vote once please. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OBJECT. I think Vanna Bonta writes much better than this Wiki entry cobbled together from multiple newspapers and resources. But I still think this article should NOT BE DELETED24.24.145.217 10:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE This discussion was completely cluttered. I have re-organized all former comments by time stamp, have removed the inappropriate user-warning templates by Tikka72, and striked-out repeated !votes. I abstain from voting. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To quote Ms. Bonat herself: "Nature abhors a vacuum, but why do most people hasten to fill in the blanks with garbage?" Indeed. DELETE Otto4711 12:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 * '''OBJECT.''' I think Vanna Bonta writes much better than this Wiki entry cobbled together from multiple newspapers and resources. But I still think this article should''' NOT BE DELETED'''[[User:24.24.145.217|24.24.145.217]] 10:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 *'''NOTE''' This discussion was completely cluttered. I have re-organized all former comments by time stamp, have removed the inappropriate user-warning templates by Tikka72, and striked-out repeated !votes. I abstain from voting. &ndash; [[User:Sgeureka|sgeureka]] <sup>[[User_talk:Sgeureka|t]]•c</sup> 10:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
+*To quote Ms. Bonat herself: "Nature abhors a vacuum, but why do most people hasten to fill in the blanks with garbage?" Indeed. '''DELETE''' [[User:Otto4711|Otto4711]] 12:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)