Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natasha Vita-More

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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The result was keep, withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:01, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Natasha Vita-More (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. I'd expect much more from an article that existed since 2006, but this looks like an average paid promo (through it is not, considering the age and creator, just shares the usual low quality red flags, including the subject editing it herself at some point: Natasha Vita-More (talk · contribs), as well as edits by a likely undisclosed paid editor Bmrg567 (talk · contribs) a few years ago. PS. No objections to drafitying this or moving this to userspace of the linked Wikipedian, who does occasionally edit the project. It would make a nice userpage, even if it fails, IMHO, the notability criteria for a regular article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:11, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:13, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:13, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 16:41, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.