Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlotta Manaigo


 * 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. Tone 15:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Carlotta Manaigo

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I admit. I'm not an expert on photographers. :) But I don't see real notability here. I see alot of sourcing from the person's website as well as other "trade" like links such as models.com and the like. I don't see anything outside of that "world" so I'm not sure it's notable for our purposes. User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 00:31, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - There is coverage in the SF Chronicle, (not safe for work image included in article), and . I'd like to see some more coverage but it seems she is of some note as a fashion photographer.  -- Whpq (talk) 17:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  23:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions.  —David Eppstein (talk) 06:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Of the three published sources listed by Whpq, the sky.it one (with the NSFW image) appears to be a trivial mention, just a listing of an upcoming exhibition, but the other two are nontrivial and, I think, enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. Irbisgreif (talk) 22:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Of the two "nontrivial" sources pointed to by David Eppstein, one is a minibio that asserts very little and is one of a set of such minibios, while the only relevant part in the other says Carlotta Manaigo, a 24-year-old graduate of the Rhode Island School of Design, was one of this year's 12 finalists featured in the October issue of Surface (the magazine prefers not to call the chosen few "winners"). As a finalist, she got to shoot on location in the Hamptons with hair, makeup and professional models -- "just like a real fashion shoot," she says -- and is now in negotiations with Kate Spade and Vidal Sassoon about shooting forthcoming ad campaigns. As somebody who's one of 12 (even one of 12 "winners") in one issue of one magazine (and not even a photographic magazine) and who got to play fashion photographer for a day -- ah, sorry, no. The hopeful term that's commonly used for people such as this is "emerging"; let's wait till reliable sources show that she has emerged. -- Hoary (talk) 22:53, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I have checked all the "references" given in the article, and the coverage linked above. I do not propose to analyse every one of them individually, but I have seen various self-promotional pages, promotion page from company selling her work, a report that five promising young photographers have put on a joint exhibition, etc. None of it constitutes substantial independent coverage, and none of it indicates that she is significant, only that she is a promising young newcomer. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No significant coverage. Bongo  matic  03:03, 18 August 2009 (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.