Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashly lorenzana


 * 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. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:05, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Ashly lorenzana

 * – ( View AfD View log )

this article is about a self-published author who appears to be pretty good at promoting herself as you can see from the two local articles listed and her own website. There doesn't appear to be anything about her outside of her own self promotion and those two small local articles. PTJoshua (talk) 00:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Her website was not included in this article at all, nor was it written to promote anything related to her. It is purely biographical information along with quotes and/or points made from the news articles I cited. One interview aired on Fox News and the newspaper article I used as a source was in no way commercial or promotional, the subject of the column was her life events, prostitution and drug addiction. Her writing was secondary to all of the aforementioned topics.


 * If her writing is secondary are you really saying that you think she should have an article because she was a drug addicted prostitute? There are kind of a lot of those and I don't think they all should have articles. PTJoshua (talk) 00:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I understand that side of the argument, you have a valid point. But I'd like to point out that while there are many drug addicted prostitutes in the world, there are not many who out themselves in the way this woman has. Few women openly share their experiences with prostitution, for a number of reasons. Also, she is an interesting case study for childhood abuse and its role in developing self-destructive behaviors such as drug addiction. While her writing may have room for improvement, after reading it I do believe it to have some sort of potential and at least some merit. She appears to be quite active politically, from what I can tell. But I understand if you disagree, perhaps it would be best to hold off and see if she decides to build on what she has already done.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 28 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete non notable 96.244.254.20 (talk) 05:30, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Lean Delete, was on the fence upon seeing one or two local articles about her and the book, but it also seems to be self-published.--Milowent • talkblp-r 13:01, 4 July 2011 (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.