Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bethany Mota


 * 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. (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica1000 01:01, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Bethany Mota

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I speedied this as non-notable, but the creator doesn't accept that, so nominating for deletion now on that basis  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:06, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Very weak keep - Looking at the references provided, there seems to have been a good deal of national coverage. What she does might be trivial, but the coverage makes her somewhat notable. noisy   jinx  huh? 11:15, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Looks fine to me. Googling her name gives multiple third-party sources, including Today, BusinessInsider, TeenVogue, Huffington Post, People, ABC, and Daily Mail. I'd say it's not that notable overall, but she's notable enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.139.19.174 (talk) 20:17, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as non notable blogger. →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  02:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Seems to be enough national coverage to me. If this is not notable I do not know what is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.141.208.110 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 7 May 2014‎
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Well, I don't like it.  I don't think we should have individual articles on YouTube celebrities that luck into mainstream coverage during a slow news day.  But she satisfies the GNG, and that's what's important.  If someone wants to start a discussion on the talk page about moving and rewriting this article to focus on hauling instead of an individual hauler, I might support that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:51, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete As no significant historical, political or cultural impact with serious self propaganda for advertising reasons. http://instagram.com/p/nZJu_AmQVZ/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Debasish Dey (talk • contribs) 10:23, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep it because this page here is overwhelmed with personal opinions, and it's completing ignoring GNG. The case of the matter here is that we have something that's proven to be reliable through third-party sources, not something we accept as worthy personally. Based on the cited sources, the article stands very well. Some people need to realize that self-propaganda, hype, sensationalism, and reason for attention are all irrelevant -- notability is fact, and it has been proven. Lassets (talk) 18:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * This is the first edit from a new account  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  20:16, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Seems to pass general notability, though just about. Mabalu (talk) 10:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep I see significant coverage from multiple sources independent of the subject. That's GNG. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Hey, I am a big fan of Mota and ever since I heard she had a Wiki page I decided to check it out, but noticed that it's being considered for deletion. I don't want to be bias by claiming to keep the article up because I'm a fan, so I did the fair thing and checked out the sources. I saw L.A. Times, Today, ET, Teen Vogue, and Business Insider, and wondered why this article is being considered for deletion in the first place (all aforementioned sources are more than enough to take the cake). So, to confirm this I will, unbiased, say that this seems notable from the sources and coverage to say keep up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.139.19.100 (talk) 18:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep for general acceptance of the general notability guidelines, mostly acceptable reliable third-party sources that prove notability (note: notability isn't synonymous with popularity), and good national and some international info on her could be found. 202.85.238.87 (talk) 19:10, 13 May 2014 (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.