Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adele Uddo


 * 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 keep. Consensus to keep and also withdrawn by nominator. RL0919 (talk) 04:41, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Adele Uddo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROMO Viztor (talk) 03:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Viztor (talk) 03:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete an overly promotional article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - First off, I, too dislike WP:PROMO, but that's not a reason to delete an article that still meets WP:NMODEL and WP:GNG. This will be an easy re-write.  Orville1974  (talk) 04:22, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The article has been scrubbed of WP:PROMO since it's nomination. Viztor and Johnpacklambert, please take another look to determine if it meets WP:NMODEL.  Thank you!  Orville1974  (talk) 05:49, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:12, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:12, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:12, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:13, 5 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - I improved the article by adding a bit more content with sources and by removing POV. Subject has had sustained wide coverage in the media as evidenced by the cited reliable sources. Easily passes WP:GNG and meets notability criteria as per WP:NMODEL. - AuthorAuthor (talk) 06:25, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the edits, AuthorAuthor. I'm glad you stepped in when you did.  Orville1974  (talk) 06:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep The variety of sources helps to assert notability. At a minimum I think the sources provide material for the generic Hand model article, which is currently lacking in same, and which could be expanded to Parts model which is not defined in the Uddo lede. Bogger (talk) 10:07, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment There does seem to be something CoI-ish about the article creator who's only made trivial grammatical edits before creating this first article as fully formed. Worth keeping an eye on, I guess. Bogger (talk) 10:15, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Hi and thank you for the review and cleanup of the article I started last night. I'm a new Wikipedia editor. I do NOT have a COI. I'm interested in models and beauty subjects, so I added the article last night. I had also planned to update the hand model article, but honestly got too tired last night. I planned to update it later today with similar sources. Adele Uddo was the most prolific hand and parts model I know about, so I started here. I'd like to do whatever I can to improve this article. Thank you. Workerbeenc (talk) 13:53, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * WithdrawnThe status of the article now is okay for me, at least not PROMO.Viztor (talk) 14:08, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Viztor: Hey, there's a 'delete' comment. So, the nomination can't be closed as 'withdrawn', unless the user changes his mind. -- M h hossein   talk 06:06, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I know, I withdrawn because I changed my mind, and I did not close the discussion.Viztor (talk) 06:12, 8 June 2019 (UTC)


 * 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.