Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Eaglesfield (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) 03:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Eaglesfield[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Sarah Eaglesfield (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not reach the notability standard either as a musician, an "innovator in digital music space", or a news analyst. References provided do not give the depth of coverage required by WP:BIO. Note that her band, Flightside is currently proposed for deletion also. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 12:25, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The only keep vote is from the same ip address belonging to the page subject, who also maintains the page and keeps removing the AFD 10Gbit (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. this qanon grifter is using this wikipedia page to create legitimacy in order to further a gofundme scam users scam. there are plenty of living qanon musicians, self published authors, and fake data scientists that dont have a wikipedia page and we should probably keep it that way. Living person? check. Notable? not really. Vanity edits? absolutely -> malwaretechblog shows self edits trophymaker ltd registration. delete? yah. post haste. please also note that the *strong keep: vote below is the actual user in question. the ip 62.31.81.43 is registered to her company trophymaker ltd. look at the edit history (talk). finally, here is subject claiming they have wikipedia blocked. subject claims to have wikipedia blocked but can still vote on this talk page. gg sarah. gg. 2603:6010:5209:FF01:7490:BAB:F587:7A24 (talk)
  • Strong Keep page vandalized constantly over last 24 hours. subject being targeted for abuse online. 2.5k+ Wiki pageviews this month, she was on TV & featured on Crowder this week. We should not tolerate bullying. 62.31.81.43 (talk) 19:40, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The article also appears to have had significant edits from the subject themselves, falling foul of the Vanity rule? Research from MalwareTechBlog's Twitter IgnoredAmbience (talk) 13:12, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep WP:POINT WP:DOGPILE please stick to the convention of debate. This is no place to attack each other and obviously a personal vendetta against Sarah. Vandals removed the new links that were added today and made inappropriate defamatory changes. Many of whom are same people voting here. Page is years old and has already met WP:N requirements. It was under patrol. New references added after original AfD removed. Bad faith action. Speedy keep.92.40.184.82 (talk) 21:57, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This person fails notability. There is as far as I can tell no RS coverage from which to construct an article. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 13:46, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete since everything seems to be passing brief mentions on personal blogs, track listings of the bands work, or dead links. I'm not seeing any reliable in-depth that addresses the person directly and in detail though. So, this article fails the notability guidelines. --Adamant1 (talk) 14:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (re?)created by a sockpuppeteer used to biographies of non-notable people, and rather clumsily populated by none other than the subject. This plus an absence of sources says enough. Popo le Chien throw a bone 15:43, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Adamant1. The presented sources do not indicate notability, especially junk like discogs, musicbrainz and youtube. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:03, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Adamant1. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 18:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wikipedia is not a place for people to promote themselves. We are not going to be the next mysapce.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:10, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and Salt. No evidence of any kind of notability. Article has been recreated and edited by a sock farm and IP that appear to have a COI with the article subject. The majority of the sourcing in the article is junk, and the good quality sources (e.g. the BBC) do not appear to be about the subject.
Also the IP editor that wrote the article is repeatedly removing the AfD template from it, can someone put it back and protect the article? 192.76.8.93 (talk) 20:21, 30 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sarah_Eaglesfield_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=991846516"