Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elena Melnik

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 no consensus. Courcelles 00:06, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Elena Melnik

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

Run-of-the-mill model. No real significant coverage, just directory-type entries like nymag.com and the Fashion Model Directory. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 15:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:14, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This appears to be a very prolific in-demand supermodel, in multiple countries no less. [1][2][3][4] and profiled by non-indiscriminate New York Magazine [5][6]. Has appeared on at least three major fashion magazine covers including Vogue. [7][8][9][10]. Just not my definition of "run-of-the-mill model." --Oakshade (talk) 07:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Six magazine covers over a career of five years is minor. Her work is primarily runway shows and editorials, which is minor as well. New York Magazine seeks to create entries for every model it can, and the majority of links you provided are unreliable sources posting copyright violations. I'd say the first link you provided is something, but as coverage goes, it's not much of something. Mbinebri ^{talk ←} 15:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Minor" models don't appear on six major fashion magazine covers in multiple countries. New York Magazine only profiles a tiny percentage of models and is very discriminate. And I've posted absolutely no copyright violated material into this article so I don't know what that charge is about. Linking to a blog that shows this person on the cover of Vogue to demonstrate notability doesn't magically mean the model was not on the cover of Vogue and not notable just because the blog might have posted a cover improperly. It would be a copyright violation if we placed copyright material into the article. In fact, magazine covers are generally considered "fair-use" are are not copy-vio in Wikipedia anyway so the point is moot. --Oakshade (talk) 16:09, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:20, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The New York Magazine constitutes significant coverage in a reliable source, but WP:N requires multiple such sources, and I am unable to find any other significant coverage either in the comments above or in my own searches. Lots of photos of a pretty girl, but nothing about her that would let us write a meaningful article. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:47, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/merge The New York magazine coverage seems enough while a really thorough search for more sources would require consideration of her name in cyrillic (Елена Мельник). The worst case is that we merge to some summary list like List of Vogue cover models. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:07, 3 January 2011 (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.