Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Bridge

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:30, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel Bridge[edit]

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

Author of self-help books. Fails WP:AUTHOR and rather blatantly written as an advertisement. Article written by SPA years ago and then built up by another SPA in 2012, so obviously this is self-promotion. Tagged for many years; article issues recently noted on project page, overdue for deletion. Coretheapple (talk) 12:52, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete good Lord, this is blatant. Hypothetically she sounds like she should be notable, in practice the rules are that a BLP must have RSes and this literally has zero. What on earth. I'm willing to be convinced, but it'll need non-hypothetical RSes and lots of them. Then the article being culled down to something based strictly on them - David Gerard (talk) 19:26, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PROMO; strictly advertorial. K.e.coffman (talk) 19:50, 2 September 2016 (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.