Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ansolet Rossouw

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. No rebuttal offered to the detailed source analysis showing a lack of sufficient sources to establish GNG. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ansolet Rossouw

[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)

Not a notable model. No references that are non-trivial and non-promotional. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:06, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and South Africa. Walsh90210 (talk) 01:06, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Fashion. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Point me to which references are "trivial" or "promotional" as last I checked, News24 is a South African news website, not PR Newswire. Marie Claire is a fashion magazine. V is a fashion magazine. CR Fashion Book is a fashion magazine and so on. None of them are providing trivia. They verified the work she's done and according to the sources… it's notable. Trillfendi (talk) 05:58, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:38, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, trivial mentions. Fails WP:GNG. Ednabrenze (talk) 03:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just asking (again) as the original creator where the "trivial mentions" in particular are here. Because according to the many sources I've been able to find that substantiate independent notability, the work in her career especially on the runway is notable. Being on the cover of Vogue in any country as a model, is notable, let alone multiple countries. Most of these metrics were decided years ago when reassessing WP:NMODEL. Sources ranging from actual newspapers in South Africa (where she and her story were literally on the front page) to actual fashion magazines, I just don't see the perceived failure of GNG. Nobody has given a clear answer on it. Trillfendi (talk) 18:36, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Let's look at the sources currently in the article:

[1] is just a data-base entry in a fashion database. It doesn't establish notability, and the only thing it's supporting is the name of her agency
[2] is an interview with her, sans any third party analysis of her or commentary on her works.
[3] mentions who she is, her height, Instagram, and agency. There are two additional sentences about her. It doesn't rise to the level of WP:SIGCOV.
[4] has two sentences about her. Again, it doesn't rise to the level of SIGCOV
[5] has her name as part of a list. It doesn't even have a picture.
[6] I was expecting to have to gloss over this one, due to the source being in Ukrainian. However, it's literally just pictures of her as part of a spread- she's credited as a model, but the source itself is unusable for any information about her. And, unless there are sources independent of both her and Vogue talking about it, it doesn't make her notable.
[7] is just an interview.
[8] is an interview with some limited commentary.
[9] is an interview with two and a half paragraph's worth of independent commentary in the beginning.
[10] is fine. The author (Marisa Crous) is in direct contact with her, but I'll AGF on editorial control and input. (It's News24)

The following aren't listed, but I've looked them up as part of my WP:BEFORE.

[11] has two, mentioning she was part of a fashion show and listing some gigs she'd had. The rest is just photos, unfortunately. It's not really SIGCOV.
[12] says its about her becoming a covergirl for NARS, but it's actually about a NARS product line.
[13] is about another fashion show. It has another few lines about her. Being generous, this rises to SIGCOV. Again, it's a News24 source by Marisa Crous

So, all in all, we have two sources that could help the subject pass WP:GNG- but both sources are written by the same author for the same newspaper, so they can't really said to be independent of each other. The relevant SNG would be Wikipedia:NMODEL//WP:NENT, which would allow her to pass if she'd had significant roles in multiple notable productions (The Vogue cover shoot is just one), or if we had sources showing her contributions to modelling were particularly unique, prolific or innovative- which, again, we not seeing. I think the promotional comments are harsh- while none of the cited news articles are hard-hitting journalism, they just seem fluffy. If the two sources were written by different authors, and there was a little bit more to them, I'd have maybe gone with a keep vote. Perhaps a bit WP:TOOSOON? No prejudice against re-creation if better sources are found. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 07:12, 28 August 2024 (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.