Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheri Elizabeth


 * 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. kelapstick(bainuu) 23:48, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Cheri Elizabeth

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable designer. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Sourced to primary and passing mentions. A search found nothing better. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:48, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   04:57, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   04:57, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   04:57, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   04:53, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 23 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Significant coverage in independent reliable sources  = passes GNG. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:55, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 1, thehypemagazine is a PR platform, not an independent source, source is just subject talking about herself, not independent coverage. 2, source is just subject talking about herself, not independent coverage. 3, just a few passing mentions, no depth of coverage, not a reliable source (from their about us, "Let us tell your story. We offer the following media teams that can help your business:"). duffbeerforme (talk) 04:43, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:03, 27 May 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. The only sources giving extensive coverage are Facebook or personal websites, which is not a RS for anything at all, let alone notability. Some of the other sources are quite literally just photographs of one or another of her dresses (like #2 or #5) or mentions not even amounting to a single sentence (like #3 or #12). I am at a losssto explain how the 6 words in #3 can possibly be readas  significant coverage.   DGG ( talk ) 02:58, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:03, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sources available don't establish notability. I'm not seeing expansion of the page solving its issues, nor do I see opportunities for a merger. -ZarosFlok (talk) 01:06, 7 June 2017 (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.