Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KaSelly

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. ✗plicit 03:53, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KaSelly

[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)

Failed AFC but editor moved it to article space anyway. Bio not yet shown to meet WP:GNG. UtherSRG (talk) 00:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fashion and Africa. UtherSRG (talk) 00:14, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Failed AFC, fails WP:GNG as all sources are promotional in nature. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 07:26, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Honourable curators, a lamentable truth presents itself: the textual tapestry of KaSelly, suffused with undue promotion, beckons the axe. Yet, I rue the vexing paradox: a refashioned article, stripped of its promotional palette, would meet the same fate. This grievous state of affairs stokes the ember of underrepresentation, a bane that continues to shroud the vibrant narratives of Africa within our digital archive. Jack4576 (talk) 10:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OMG! That comment needs to be preserved for all time! - UtherSRG (talk) 11:40, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Promo for a non-notable "designer". No sources other than the fluff one in the article that I can find. Oaktree b (talk) 13:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Agrees with all Delete comments and nomintor. Historical Heritages of Bihar (talk) 18:13, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Oaktree b. Fails GNG and lacks SIGCOV. Nythar (💬-🍀) 09:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Just promotional material really. ULPS (talk) 20:48, 22 May 2023 (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.