Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Ji-ae (singer)

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. SpinningSpark 00:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Ji-ae (singer)[edit]

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

Totally non-notable person whose only claim to fame is to have been a member, briefly, of a K-pop group. Unreferenced article, nothing of note outside that group. Drmies (talk) 16:25, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: her fame was fleeting and even in her prime she was unnotable Asdklf; (talk) 04:38, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. Shinyang-i (talk) 03:33, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No notability outside of her former group, and was unnotable even when a member. No evidence of significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Shinyang-i (talk) 16:12, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retain. I've had a look around, and she has some third party coverage as part of her new band Jevice. While the band is not incredibly notable, there is enough there to justify a page. I've added three references, including coverage of Jevice. Ross-c (talk) 13:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 06:11, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Sorry, but the supposed "third party coverage" that Ross-c's added to the article are casual mentions: "Ji-ae's joined this new band, the end." The GNG requires that any source used to back notability up discusses the subject in significant detail. A handful of words explicitly doesn't qualify, according to the guideline. (This leaves aside that the article itself is a scanty, barely literate mess.) Nha Trang ^Allons! 21:23, 5 January 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.