Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allison Smith (professional telephone voice)


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:23, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Allison Smith (professional telephone voice)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be successful in her field but fails both WP:GNG & WP:CREATIVE. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:59, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:59, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:59, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as none of this is enough for the applicable creative people notability. SwisterTwister   talk  06:45, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - while it could be considered to have significant coverage, it is not within reliable sources - most content is from personal websites and reddit. As such, I don't think it fits within WP:GNG. Ajraddatz (Talk) 09:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Lacks reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG. Edwardx (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. If there were enough reliable source coverage to meet WP:GNG, then she'd be eligible to have an article regardless of whether "professional telephone voice" was compelling enough to pass WP:CREATIVE or not — but the sourcing here is entirely to primary sources like her own company's website, her own company's press releases and a Reddit AMA. No person, regardless of the notability claim being made, ever gets to keep an article that's sourced like this. Bearcat (talk) 19:52, 24 February 2016 (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.