Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kelly A. Hyman

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:54, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly A. Hyman[edit]

[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)

As per the last AFD, still no indication she is notable. this isn't independent rs, it's a press release, this write up is a puff piece and wasn't enough last time, imdb isn't rs, random forbes contributor pieces aren't rs and this readers digest uk article was written by the manager of a marketing company. Praxidicae (talk) 14:33, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. I don't have access to the previous incarnation of the page, which was deleted as the outcome of an AfD discussion in 2017, so I can't assess whether the current page is different from/better than its predecessor: however, there's nothing in the current page to demonstrate notability per WP:NACTOR, WP:NAUTHOR or WP:ANYBIO. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 15:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete being the wife of a federal judge is not a default sign of notability, and that is probably the best angle Mrs. Hyman had for notability. Her career as an actress was not enough to establish notability. Her role as a journalist and writer is just not enough to make her notable, nor is her role as a broadcast journalist. Her actions as a lawyer are worded in a truly promotional style here, but there is so little substance that even the excessive promotionalism of the article leaves us with nothing.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:35, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There's zero to base her notability on at this point and she doesn't just get an article because she's married to a federal judge. It's also obvious from the promotionalism in the article and recreation after another AfD that this is probably an advert article. which we shouldn't encourage. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:44, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indication of notability. scope_creep^Talk 09:23, 19 September 2020 (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.