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 keep. Could relist it to death but it's pointless - 2 weeks of it has only gained 2 !keeps so pointless doing a third, Consensus is they meet GNG (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 22:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bertha Sneck[edit]

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

Analysis of sources at The Language reference desk suggests that while there are some RS, there's no in-depth coverage of this person. Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 11:16, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:10, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Already quickly seeing nice source coverage, including an edited work by subject, at Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. In addition, this film Small Happiness is dedicated to Bertha Sneck OCLC 82203089, and the book The Dead Suffered Too english language edition was edited by Bertha Sneck OCLC 37259485. — Cirt (talk) 18:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep only if can be improved as I would've also actually suggested Drafting instead to allow time for improvements. SwisterTwister talk 04:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:14, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Article meets WP:GNG criteria. Article needs clean-up, not deletion per WP:ATD. Hmlarson (talk) 18:10, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Hmlarson. Needs a lot of cleanup, but clearly GNG. (Why keep relisting? It's adequate to keep, no need to remove to draft space). Montanabw ^(talk) 22:24, 20 April 2016 (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.