Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amber Martinez

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:09, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Amber Martinez[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)

Not yet notable per WP:NACTOR: all minor roles only so far, with no significant coverage in reliable sources online. Not yet notable per WP:NMODEL: I can find no significant coverage online of the "Ms United Nations" pageant that the article claims she's won. The "2021 Asian Film Festival" might be notable, but I can find no significant coverage of that either, nor of her future role in it. There's a reality television contestant with this name, who appears to be a separate and unrelated person. Captain Calm (talk) 13:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC) striking confirmed blocked sockpuppet, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:30, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Captain Calm (talk) 13:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Captain Calm (talk) 13:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Captain Calm (talk) 13:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Delete not notable as either an actress nor as a model.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:12, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as an official judge of the 2021 Asian films festival and act on notable titles. (official site of Asian Film Festival and her profile), sources totally can verify that also this photo is the proof. XZ2X (talk) 14:22, 12 November 2020 (UTC)— XZ2X (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. sock strike Spiderone 22:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Your allegations are not true. The link was posted to the cover of the magazine, that she was on for her beauty pageant title wins and apparently you didn't look well, because here she is all over GETTY IMAGES: https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/miss-north-america-united-nations-amber-martinez-arrives-news-photo/511272168,

https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/amber-martinez-attends-ezway-magazine-pre-release-event-on-news-photo/502085634?adppopup=true, https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/amber-martinez-attends-ezway-magazine-pre-release-event-on-news-photo/502085632?adppopup=true, https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/ms-north-america-united-nations-2016-amber-martinez-attends-news-photo/613797614?adppopup=true, https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/ms-north-america-united-nations-2016-amber-martinez-and-pop-news-photo/613797620?adppopup=true, https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/ms-north-america-united-nations-2016-amber-martinez-attends-news-photo/614451718?adppopup=true, https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/ms-united-nations-globe-2016-attends-los-angeles-travel-news-photo/586878764?adppopup=true, https://www.gettyimages.com.au/detail/news-photo/ms-united-nations-globe-2016-attends-los-angeles-travel-news-photo/586878820?adppopup=true,

And I guess, you did not look at the articles in the LA Tribune, E! News! or any other valid news source for the 2021 Asian Film Festival...So here is this for reference, she is right here, getting her judges appointment on their official website: https://asianfilmfestival.us/?page_id=33543

And Amber Martinez is a vaild SAG-AFTRA union actress and has acted in all of those roles, those credits are all valid. She is a member of the Screen Actors Guild and the official guild member for music composing, the Society of Composers and Lyricists (SCL). She is a valid actress and is known. The Page should stay. It is valid and she is relevant as an actress, a beauty pageant winner, and a judge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by all the facts on the page are valid and verifiable. AmyMHollywoodNow (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 November 2020 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: AmyMHollywoodNow (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

Delete A bunch of these sources are just the same pr article on different SEO/Fake News sites. I guess AmyMHollywoodNow did not look to check that the Los Angeles Tribune went out of business in the 1960's and the naming rights are currently owned by an SEO/PR Firm before accusing Captain Calm of not going through the sources. Getty Images is not a reliable source at all, either. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:53, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - almost every source is a rehashing of the exact same news article; this completely and utterly fails WP:NACTOR, WP:GNG, WP:BIO etc. etc. Spiderone 15:59, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm not even going to bother with an indepth source analysis, this is just ridiculous PR spam. Praxidicae (talk) 16:26, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep - Comment I've added even more news articles from many different sites. that confirm she is valid and I will keep doing so and updating accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmyMHollywoodNow (talk • contribs) 16:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You may not vote twice, all you've done is successfully mucked up the article with a bunch of nonsensical PR spam. Praxidicae (talk) 16:47, 12 November 2020 (UTC) Praxidicae I did not muck up the article at all. I am changing and updated the sources.[reply]

What part of "you may not vote twice" is unclear? You're welcome to comment but you've already voted keep once. Stop doing it. Praxidicae (talk) 16:50, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AmyMHollywoodNow: you can comment as much as you want, but you can only vote once. Also in what world is PR Photos Celebrity News a reliable source? Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:51, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will keep working on fixing my sources and the page. But my valid page, should not be removed. I will contact the Wikipedia Foundation if I have too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmyMHollywoodNow (talk • contribs) 17:01, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AmyMHollywoodNow: To say what? That Praxidicae is following Wikipedia policies by removing spam links and likely outing yourself as an paid editor? I recommend reading Wikipedia:BOOMERANG. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:05, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a paid editor. I didn't even know that existed. I am just trying to do this page right with the sources. I will contact the Wikipedia Foundation. I stand by what I said. This is a valid public figure and working SAG-AFTRA Union Actor. I am updating my sources and will continue to be doing more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmyMHollywoodNow (talk • contribs) 17:08, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what good that will do AmyMHollywoodNow, the WMF has absolutely no control over editorial decisions or content. What is your goal with contacting them, exactly? Praxidicae (talk) 17:30, 12 November 2020 (UTC) talk[reply]

I know, that WMF has the power to do many things, including removing editors who are bullying people. I know that if you delete pages, that you get points added to your account. I also know, that Captain Calm has been bullying me the entire time, I have been on Wikipedia (literally since day 1). He has also sent a harassing message to my private talk box today. I will not be cyber bullied...I am simply trying to fix and update my sources, to finish my page. Captain Calm, has been trying to delete everything I have done since the beginning of me being on Wikipedia. I definitely feel harassed and bullied.— Preceding unsigned comment added by AmyMHollywoodNow (talk • contribs)

I know that if you delete pages, that you get points added to your account. Man, wish someone had told me that. Where do I redeem these points? Asking for a friend, of course. Praxidicae (talk) 18:21, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is a real actress with real and notable credits. This page should not be deleted, this page is factual. She was just in the Los Angeles Tribune yesterday morning, everyone saw it because it was on the front page. And she was Ms. United Nations Globe, I read that article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Taskforce51mc (talk • contribs) sock strike Praxidicae (talk) 21:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi totally not a sock editor, where does one pick up a newspaper that hasn't put out a print copy since 1960 and who's current "editorial staff" are not actually journalists but people who's photos are of people covered in previous "articles"? Best, GPL93 (talk) 21:51, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GPL93, Their edit patterns seem identical. SPI case and maybe a final TPaccess revoke may be appropriate. —moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 10:23, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a spam article about a non-notable actress. Blablubbs ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:10, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fail WP:NACTOR and no notable works, I think the article is WP:MASK too. --Ibrahim.ID ✪ 13:57, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kansas-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 12:35, 21 November 2020 (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.