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; redirect allowed. - Mailer Diablo 01:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable. No significant coverage in reliable sources Just citied from another site local TV presonality NYYankee2684 03:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This subject does not have any substantive coverage in reliable sources. This subject has also not been the subject of any published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the article. --Siva1979Talk to me 03:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Don't Speedy - I've removed the copyvio stuff, and am working on the article. Not sure if there is enough to qualify it, will have an opinion later. CitiCat ♫ 04:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Changed my mind, but I still stand by the delete for now. =^^= --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 04:51, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No argument with deleting. Maybe revisit topic in a couple of years. CitiCat ♫ 13:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't seem to be any notability regardless for this well-liked but rookie broadcaster. --Dhartung | Talk 08:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In its current state, yeah, this is warranted. Shall we close the AFD as redirected? --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 21:13, 14 October 2007 (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.