Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yliana Yepez

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. SarahStierch (talk) 07:21, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yliana Yepez[edit]

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

The primary notability listed in the lede is that she was nominated for an award for "best handbag" by a fashion magazine(I don't think this would be notability even if she had won it.

Everything else is purely promotional. I considered using G11, but I bring it here for general attention because the editor has also written a number of other promotional articles, like my two immediately preceding afd listings (and, to be fair, also done some unrelated good editing) DGG ( talk ) 20:22, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Venezuela-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A handbag? The only substantial coverage seems to have originated in press releases. Thincat (talk) 19:12, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not mean to imply that it is impossible to be notable for designing a handbag or other fashion accessory, or that it could not be demonstrated by a prize of international or possibly even national significance. This instance, though, was a nomination only, and for a rather minor award. DGG ( talk ) 02:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fully understand that. My reference to a handbag, which betrayed my age and nationality, was on account of a fond and nostalgic memory of The Importance of Being Earnest (1952 film), and had no relevance to the AfD. My apologies. I think the article would best be deleted. Thincat (talk) 10:04, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ Comment--While many of the sources are weak (press release) or completely inappropriate (magazine articles about the purse not the person) there are enough other reliable sources to warrant this article being cut back and maintained as a stub/start class article IMO.[1][2][3][4]-- — Keithbob • Talk • 01:49, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After looking more closely at the sources I am removing my keep vote. This article is a feature on the subject which details her personal life and career and is a legit source with valid editorial staff. However, this nomination for an award in In Style magazine is a minor mention for a nomination only. This one features information both on the BLP subject and her bag designs but does not appear to have editorial oversight or notability as a source. And finally This one has some biographical content but I can not find any indication of professional editorial supervision so it would likely not hold up as a reliable secondary source.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 20:57, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ES &L 12:13, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 November 12. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 04:12, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I have been unable to find anything that looks like substantial independent coverage. (Even the one "keep" proposer, having rejected existing sources because they are "press release[s]" or "magazine articles about the purse not the person", then goes on to link to four sources one of which is about the purse, barely mentioning the person, and all of which look like press release write ups, advertorials, or similar. If that is the best that can be found by someone who thinks the article should be kept, it is not a good sign.) JamesBWatson (talk) 14:56, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hmm. Tough one. The handbags are clearly attracting attention, the designer less so. Really not sure on this one, but personally, as a fashion cove, I am kinda leaning keep, though I think the article could be stubified. But I'm not going to commit to a vote either way. Mabalu (talk) 17:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 18:58, 22 November 2013 (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.