Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samantha Sleeper (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Samantha Sleeper[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[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)

American fashion designer that does not seem to meet WP:GNG. Created by WP:SPA, references in the article as well as in my BEFORE fail WP:SIGCOV and are of borderline reliability at best (some are press releases or obvious rewrites of this type of sourcing). Ps. I note no consensus AfD in 2016. The article has not improved since and per my BEFORE, there is nothing to improve this with. As our standards improve, this seems below what we consider acceptable in 2023 when it comes for living people. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Fashion, and United States of America. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:36, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: I reworked the article - rewrote a lot of the questionable article text, removed some sources, and added some coverage from more reputable publications - though I'm not sure if the article meets WP:GNG at this point. Bridget (talk) 00:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bridget Do you think we have at least two sources about her that meet WP:SIGCOV and are of course reliable? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, doesn't look like it - but maybe another editor more familiar with fashion can chime in. I think it's now borderline with the added news sources, especially the Women's Wear Daily article from 2020. I'm just not too sure how some of the article's older sources (from lesser known fashion outlets) stand in terms of reliability and SIGCOV. Bridget (talk) 16:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:03, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:43, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, in addition to the extensive sourcing already in the article, there's this interview by Racked Chicago (a subsidiary of Vox Media) and this article by Yahoo! News about her creating a wedding dress that accommodates breastfeeding, which seems revolutionary in fashion (not yet mentioned in the article). Left guide (talk) 11:01, 8 January 2024 (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.