Talk:Suzzan Blac

What seems to be the problem?
Everything in this article has been cited. I don't see why there should be a problem with notability.
 * In general, notability is an attempt to assess whether the topic has "gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time" as evidenced by significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic. The article so far comes no where near meeting this criteria.Theroadislong (talk) 20:14, 28 April 2012 (UTC)


 * OK. but i would question the idea that this article comes "no where near" that criteria. it states that a secondary source should "exercise some form of editorial control." sources include published magazine articles, and independent on-line articles. also if you google the term "suzzan blac" you will get over 9000 hits. i will in time present more evidence in the article. but in the mean time i will have to ask you to show me which part of the criteria this article does not meet. secondly, i see that you have put up a tag on the page stating that you believe it to be bias, please can you state in what way it is so. Saxon-hall (talk) 00:58, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The tag sates "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject." I see no mention of bias? The references include the artists own website a "twitpic" and numerous blogs, these are not considered reliable third party references.Theroadislong (talk) 08:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)