Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lindsey Blaufarb

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. Secret ^account 03:07, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsey Blaufarb[edit]

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

Fails basic criteria WP:BASIC for biographical notability: must be "subject of multiple published secondary sources". A Google search revealed an MTV link that was only a slide show. Five pages of Google returns showed only blogs, primary and self-written sources, social networking sites, and websites linking to movie info (apparently she played a cheerleader extra). I'm not saying this person isn't well-known in her own sphere, but she's simply not encyclopedic. Finally, it is more than apparent that the article was created and updated by either her or someone known to her who knows her nicknames (LindsayB Out There, when other (non-notable) websites/blogs listed her as "Out There" only) and even scholarship information, and an external link is a direct link to her resume (I guess, I didn't download it). – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:51, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 18:13, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

question Is there sufficient evidence she was a member of the cvarious groups listed in the article, and are the groups actually notable? DGG (at NYPL) 19:11, 11 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (NYPL) (talk • contribs)

In the external links is a link to the Beat Freaks site and she's pictured on the right (because of her social networking status, Google images has a ton of images of her). I was considering adding links here to Beat Freaks (Team iLuminate I think is probably sourced ok... I don't know if that makes it notable, but I'm not going to worry about it). Beat Freaks has a bunch of sources that are just silly and don't tell you anything, but I wasn't jumping the gun on that one. To the point, again, the only proof she's part of those groups, aside for OR visual recognition, is social networking and blog mentions. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 23:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I found pretty much the same as what nom describes – mostly PR material and nothing source-able. Agricola44 (talk) 16:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:40, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 15:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails general notability guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:42, 21 February 2013 (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.