Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hong Tran
My concurrence was that the history of the Hong Tran article was a mess, due to the edit war.  It was heavily redacted during the days leading up to the AfD request, which made it difficult for people to see what the article actually consisted of, and how much press she had gotten.  I'm sure it's also difficult for people to sort through all the issues of the edit war itself, which is why it should have been in mediation instead.  If you were saying something different than that, then I don't concur.  I certainly don't concur with Nottingham's analysis of what you wrote -- just because you said you didn't have all the facts, I didn't conclude that you thought I had given inaccurate information.  If you do, please specify, because I believe that everything I have said is accurate.  I'm not dealing with Nottingham's allegations anymore at this point because I don't feel it is productive; I would be surprised if anyone who views his http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nottingham&action=history talk page history, with it's repeated blanking of admin comments, would give his allegations any credit at this point.  My contention was and is that this AfD never should have been nominated in the first place, because it was an edit war issue.  In that sense, I agree with your second opinion (the switch to Strong Keep, because it is an edit war issue).  I think it is appropriate for the AfD to end, as long as the article is kept; but there is no reason why another one should be started.  I would expect that a second AfD would have similar results anyway.  I also think that this AfD has shown that there is a significant number of people who think that Hong Tran has sufficent notability to meet , which is the technical basis upon which Bobblehead was submitting it, even if the practical purpose was to end the edit war.  Anyhow, it seems that the whole purpose of AfD (since we are in the process, regardless of whether it was proper or not) is to reach consensus.  I will propose '''Keep''', with a scheduled re-evaluation after the Nov. 2008 U.S. Congressional elections
— User:Emcee, 06:02, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BIO (Wikipedia:Notability)