Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Todd

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 13:37, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ruth Todd

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Todd's career in television news does not rise to notability under the WP:GNG. Consider checking inbound links and moving Ruth Todd (researcher) here if deleted. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While there are sources that show her career, they are not the type that would pass GNG. With her being a spokeperson for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from 2010-2013 there are lots of quotes from her in the media, but the articles are about other things and quote her, they do not provide substantial coverage of her.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:42, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:54, 17 July 2021 (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.