Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Judith Masini

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. Sandstein 07:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Judith Masini[edit]

If anyone has anything constructive to add, I am all ears. From where I stand all I see is "x****$£$$$""""#####" - Thanks. Jerome_Ornicar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerome Ornicar (talk • contribs) 13:16, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

WP:BLP of a writer, created by a person with an evident conflict of interest if you compare the creator's username to the name of the article subject's own self-launched publishing company, which makes and sources no strong claim to passing WP:NAUTHOR. The referencing here is almost entirely to blogs and YouTube videos, and the only reference which actually counts as reliable source coverage (La Dépeche) isn't substantively about her, but merely namechecks her existence as a participant in the thing that is the subject. Which means that the article is not adequately sourced to pass WP:GNG either. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 15:52, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:54, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:54, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:54, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as non-notable and WP:ADMASQ. The last sentence may indicate more sourcing, and the magazine who named her "one of 50 French people influential in London" is high-circulation, but it is unsourced, and the set of French people in London is small so any entrepreneur of a small business can probably receive an interview. Esquivalience ^t 19:00, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Speaking of unsourced statement, I've found "the set of French people in London is small" is unsourced. I can source the opposite statement with http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-18234930 as reference: "More French people live in London than in Bordeaux, Nantes or Strasbourg and some now regard it as France's sixth biggest city in terms of population." and "The French consulate in London estimates between 300,000 and 400,000 French citizens live in the British capital" [emphasis added]. --Dereckson (talk) 11:17, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments. Both the article creator user account containing and the publishing house contain "Ornicar", so it's indeed probably an self promotional article. By the way, the article creator should be informed about the paid contributions policy and invited to add relevant disclaimer.
There is a screenshot of the article in L'Express here. Announcement of the publication could be found here. So I guess the reference is L. Da., Judith Masini. Un rêve bilingue., L'Express Théma, #10, April-May-June 2010. --Dereckson (talk) 11:37, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, the youtube link you mention is an interview from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_3. Furthermore this is the article by l'Express : L'Express. Hope that sheds some light on the validity of the sources. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerome Ornicar (talk • contribs) 20:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC) Further on the point "Not many French people live in London" : Is London really France's 'sixth biggest city'?. L'Express and France3 are national scale media. Source is undoubtedly biased, although the tone was changed to make it compliant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerome Ornicar (talk • contribs) 20:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the current article simply has no better convincing signs for WP:CREATIVE. SwisterTwister talk 04:47, 29 March 2016 (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.