Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simone Williams

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. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:12, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Simone Williams[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)

Appears to be a non-notable fashion designer. Biography fails WP:NOTNEWS, WP:BLP1E, WP:BIO1E. One sentence at most is WP:DUE at afro, if that. (NPP action) Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:18, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:18, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:18, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:18, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Her notability is clearly tied to her Guinness World Records achievement. Passes WP:ANYBIO criteria 1 as a world record holder.4meter4 (talk) 22:59, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A world record is more about coming up with a category rather than doing something meaningful. And, we should consider Guinness World Records#Change in business model. That one can pay to get into the books means it is not a reliable source for whether an achievement is worthy of note. For notable records, we get sustained coverage for the recordholder afterwards. One time coverage at the time is classic WP:NOTNEWS. Secondly, WP:NOPAGE applies; since every source is about the record, there is no material to write a biography with except about the record, which is one sentence: "Simone Williams holds the Guinness World Record for the largest afro". Finally, the sensible use of WP:ANYBIO is with WP:NEXIST. We, for example, "Keep" a composer nominated for an Oscar before the internet, because we are convinced we don't have access to all the sources and we expect an oscar nom to generate SIGCOV. Such is not the case here, where we have seen all the coverage related to this ANYBIO achievement, and it is clearly NOTNEWS and not SIGCOV. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:11, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm failing to find anything apart from her hair. There is this [1], and there ought to have been something here [2] except most of what I hoped would have been genuine information wasn't there to be found. Her hair does seem to have made quite an impression. Elemimele (talk) 18:36, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Guinness World Record is not enough to justify notability of the subject. DMySon (talk) 10:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Notability is not inherited, and apparently Guinness World Records are not what they once were (in addition to the fact that a pass of ANYBIO - or any other criteria - is not absolute; as clearly stated at Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Additional_criteria). Celebrity magazines and WP:BLP1E/NOTNEWS coverage is also not sufficient; as per the nominators rationale. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:03, 2 October 2021 (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.