Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lena Li (2nd nomination)

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. -- Cirt (talk) 15:04, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lena Li

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

Fails WP:ENT, no indication the subject can satisfy the GNG or any other specialized guideline. All Gnews hits refer to other, similarly named people; no nontrivial GBooks hits. No reliable sources in article, refs are SPS and retail sites. Survived AFD in 2007 on grounds that an (unsourced) claim of appearing on the cover of Playboy-related magazines (but never appearing in the original title) was sufficient to establish notability, an outcome that's not consistent with current practice or guidelines. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 23:44, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Playboy model/cover girl is just as notable today as it was in 2007. The only thing that has changed is that a group of biased editors has changed our home-made definition of "Notability". This is the height of POV and OR, and is against the spirit in which Wikipedia was founded. It is a disgrace that Jimbo allows such bigotry and censorship to go on by editors who rarely, if ever contribute anything to the project but argument and ill-will. Dekkappai (talk) 02:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Since the subject has never been a "Playboy cover girl," at least in terms of the notable magazine, as opposed to its non-notable related publications, and since there is no reliable sourcing even for that claim, this ranting should be given negligible weight. I hope, when the AFD is closed. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can find no evidence of notability as Wikipedia defines it. --MelanieN (talk) 13:11, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Agreed with MelanieN, can't find evidence of notability sufficient for WP, or RS. She clearly did appear on the cover of several special editions and foreign issues of Playboy, but that's not sufficient. Watch the tone on both sides of this discussion, folks. Шизомби (Sz) (talk) 04:41, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per MelanieN. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:56, 30 July 2010 (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.