CZ Talk:Cold Storage/Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Who?

Just arrived by 'random page'. Is this all about this one little-known person and supported only by her own stuff? Aleta Curry 00:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

It's an import that hasn't been improved or really put into WP format. That said, she does seem to have some significance, especially having a recent President of Chile in the family. Article needs work and I don't have time for it. Howard C. Berkowitz 00:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
If it were decided to delete this as an unimproved import, I wouldn't scream about it. Howard C. Berkowitz 03:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Being the president's aunt has not lent her sufficient notability for a Wikipedia article. Full of the kind of mumbojumbo that CZ needs to disassociate itself from. Ro Thorpe 22:12, 6 April 2011 (UTC)---calls herself a cosmologist!
(In this post I am speaking as a constable, who is being asked to do a speedydelete.) Some of the above do not seem to be valid reasons for a speedydelete. For example, we don't currently have a "notability" policy, do we? At least it's not mentioned as a reason for deletion in the "Article Deletion Policy" page. And yes, I'd agree that the assertions that Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet makes are mumbojumbo, but the author of the article was (mostly) careful to say that PN-B *says* x, y, and z, not to write as if Citizendium itself was claiming x, y, and z; and there are references to verify that, yes, PN-B did in fact say those things. So I don't think that either notability nor mumbojumboness qualifies as a reason for an author and a constable to speedydelete this article.
Those may be reasons for some serious revisions to the article (including, as Ro points out, some discussion of what a cosmologist actually is), but *under the current deletion policy,* they do not seem to be reasons permitting the deletion of an article, at least not without an Editor so requesting, and no Editor has so requested.
But, as Howard points out, this article was imported from somewhere else and has not been significantly changed in about 4 years. *That* definitely falls under one of the categories that allows a constable to delete an article without any Editorial approval or intervention. I'm inclined to do so for that reason. But I will wait a day or so for any comments in case I'm misinterpreting the policy. Bruce M. Tindall 22:52, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
I didn't get a chance to see the article, but your reasoning is exactly correct, provided that the "import" status means that no significant changes were made initially. Otherwise, an "import with no changes in four years" would include many hundreds of articles. D. Matt Innis 11:29, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Yes, that was the case. Bruce M. Tindall 14:07, 8 April 2011 (UTC)