Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rianna Loving

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 speedy keep. per SK1 & all that fun stuff. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 03:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rianna Loving

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

Withdrawn by nominator after additional sources added. Though one source is a apsssing mention, I believe it meets requirements to survive as a stub.Flat Out let's discuss it 03:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:GNG and WP:BLPNOTE. Apart from one source to confirm the subject has a company and a few like this that indicate she had a minor acting career, there is nothing to support the notability of the subject. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:46, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It should be noted that before nominating this for deletion, the nominator basically blanked the article. If anyone wants to evaluate the article as it was actually written, it is here: [1]. Full disclosure: I was the person who removed ~~Flat Out's~~ the original speedy tag, saying I didn't think the article qualified for A7 or G11. I have no opinion about this AfD, but it does bother me to see someone gut an article and then nominate for deletion the empty shell that remains. --MelanieN (talk) 03:02, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Correction MelanieN you removed another editor's speedy tag (User:Trivialist) - here and noted that "deleting speedy tags: there are credible claims of significance, and promotion can be handled by editing. Other avenues of deletion remain available." I also nominated it for speedy deletion because it appeared blatantly promotional but noticed it had previously been nominated for speedy deletion and removed that tag. I then reviewed the article line by line and found it was full of unspported claims about the subject, and contained many inline urls to external company websites associated with the subject. I also removed two tables, one being an unsourced list of acting roles, and one being a list of links to product advertising. I agree with User:Trivialist that it warranted speedy deletion. Feel free to review any of my edits and I will happily debate them. I also corrected my edit summary that imdb profile appeared fake. Flat Out let's discuss it 03:12, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies for the error. I misread the history. --MelanieN (talk) 03:17, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MelanieN would you be kind enough to do an early close? Flat Out let's discuss it 03:33, 4 March 2015 (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.