The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 01:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC) reply
BLP of questionable notability, and it appears that the subject has repeatedly requested the deletion of the article. If this were Prince Charles, that obviously wouldn't matter, but we're dealing with a small-business owner here. Regardless of the subject's preferences (and more importantly), he just doesn't seem notable enough to warrant an encyclopedia article. Only a couple hundred Google hits; owning a boutique does not require encyclopedic coverage faithless (speak) 05:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete: There were some other claims to notability in earlier versions of the article but they were uncited and uncertain. Delete: unnotable. Babakathy ( talk) 06:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete: Lots of plausible claims, but no independent evidence of notability. Pdfpdf ( talk) 12:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete. Had the earlier claims been sourced, I might feel differently. However, nothing is there now that indicates that this person is notable. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 13:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete: I don't see anything here asserted that would make him actually notable--whether or not he wanted to be included. DGG ( talk) 05:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete fails WP:BIO Gtstricky Talk or C 14:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Comment Anonymous editor 69.143.57.71 did actually post the below text to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, but it was reverted as vandalism as it was posted in the wrong place:
The result was delete. Cirt ( talk) 01:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC) reply
BLP of questionable notability, and it appears that the subject has repeatedly requested the deletion of the article. If this were Prince Charles, that obviously wouldn't matter, but we're dealing with a small-business owner here. Regardless of the subject's preferences (and more importantly), he just doesn't seem notable enough to warrant an encyclopedia article. Only a couple hundred Google hits; owning a boutique does not require encyclopedic coverage faithless (speak) 05:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete: There were some other claims to notability in earlier versions of the article but they were uncited and uncertain. Delete: unnotable. Babakathy ( talk) 06:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete: Lots of plausible claims, but no independent evidence of notability. Pdfpdf ( talk) 12:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete. Had the earlier claims been sourced, I might feel differently. However, nothing is there now that indicates that this person is notable. → Wordbuilder ( talk) 13:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete: I don't see anything here asserted that would make him actually notable--whether or not he wanted to be included. DGG ( talk) 05:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Delete fails WP:BIO Gtstricky Talk or C 14:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC) reply
Comment Anonymous editor 69.143.57.71 did actually post the below text to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, but it was reverted as vandalism as it was posted in the wrong place: