Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yasmina Siadatan (3rd 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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:55, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yasmina Siadatan[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)

Delete The subject appears elsewhere in contestant listings The Apprentice (British series 5). This additional article is minimal and adds nothing of value. It has got smaller and smaller in the ten+ years it has existed; it now comprises just seven sentences (excluding references).Tomintoul (talk) 11:18, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This discussion page was created without the {{afd2}} template and not transcluded to a daily log. Fixed now--I have no opinion of my own on the nomination at this time. --Finngall ^talk 15:46, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:59, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:59, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

weak delete although this person has been on the BBC and the Telegraph, there is not enough coverage to keep the page. CambridgeGraduate (talk) 19:09, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Passes WP:GNG. Sources such as: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] etc. Keith D (talk) 09:05, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Keith D You need to add these references to the article if you are using them as justification for keeping it. Of the five existing references listed in the article, three are dead (1, 3, 5). Tomintoul (talk) 15:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment 2 have been now been replaced & 1 switched to use archive URL. Keith D (talk) 18:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Tomintoul: AFD participants aren't obliged to improve the page under discussion. See WP:NOTCLEANUP and WP:NEXIST. pburka (talk) 12:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Maybe not, pburka but it's helpful to all concerned, so thank you Keith D Tomintoul (talk) 17:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 18:23, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:16, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:02, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Keith D - Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 13:12, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. WP:ONEVENT case to me, not much to say about her. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: (weak) I think Keith D sources (except for the Sun) squeaks this article just past the line. // Timothy :: talk 11:29, 9 September 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.