Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patricia Yunghanns

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. Missvain (talk) 04:07, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Patricia Yunghanns[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)

A non-notable author with no significant coverage in reliable sources and no evidence of satisfying WP:NAUTHOR. Likely a case of undisclosed paid editing too. GSS ^💬 11:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. GSS ^💬 11:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. GSS ^💬 11:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 12:05, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- This does pass WP:NAUTHOR with independent sources that demonstrate notability like Business Insiderand Yahoo. Millgh (talk) 10:01, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They are both press releases from GlobeNewswire so please spend some time on reading the wikpedia policies to understand why your most recent edit was reverted. GSS ^💬 10:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for WP:UPE and/or sockpuppetry. MER-C 17:41, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:N/WP:AUTHOR. All sources appear to be primary (including many, many press releases), unreliable (storefronts and the like), and trivial mentions. I'm not seeing significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources. Woodroar (talk) 14:21, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - subject fails to meet WP:NAUTHOR criteria. All of the sources cited in the article appear to be written by the subject or based upon information written by the subject (WP:PRIMARY). Even the local news outlet sources are re-published content from unreliable sources like ABNewswire. In addition, there is no third-party coverage cited that could be used to assert the subject meets the criteria laid down by WP:NAUTHOR. SamHolt6 (talk) 14:57, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not enough coverage to pass WP:GNG, and does not meet WP:NAUTHOR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:37, 20 December 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.