Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christina El Moussa


 * 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) Exemplo347 (talk) 09:55, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Christina El Moussa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article has been on AfD in 2015, and the decision was merge as the subjest is not notable. Today an account with 27 total edits restored the article, claiming the individual is notable because of her diviorce, and indeed added some info about the divorce. The article is slightly different from the version of two years ago, and therefore AfD seems to be a suitable process to delete it, rather than CSD. Ymblanter (talk) 08:43, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:30, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:30, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:30, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   10:57, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   10:58, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


 *  Speedy Delete and Redirect: Divorce section contains copyvio WP:G12 of People 's article. Even without the details in Christina El Moussa being copyvio, that section needs to be nuked from orbit for weight/NPOV/BLP and sooner rather than later. The couple divorced; that can be dealt with in half a sentence at Flip or Flop. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 12:38, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Follow-up: Speedy struck on the presumption of revdelling. Re WP:OSE, the same case applies for for keeping Tarek El Moussa as a separate article vs redirecting to Flip Or Flop as it does to Christine El Moussa. The issue with both is that their individual notability does not appear separable from each other, nor does their combined notability appear separable from Flip or Flop. Almost all of this article is actually about the couple and their combined activities, as is, for instance, the provided story. Considering the three possibilities (1: separate pages for each + separate page for Flip or Flop; 2: combined page for the pair plus separate page for Flip or Flop; 3: combined detail at Flip or Flop)... Option 1 results in blanket duplication across at least two pages. Option 2 would allow duplication to be avoided, which I find an acceptable compromise, though some might find this awkward given the personal split although they remain a professional duo. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 11:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep – I've fixed the copyvio and improved the tone of the divorce section. Otherwise, the subject has vast coverage in sources. Most of this is, admittedly, in the context of Tarek El Moussa or Flip or Flop; and published by notoriously unreliable celebrity gossip newspapers like The Daily Mail. However, it demonstrates a significant fanbase, which means the subject passes WP:CELEBRITY. Digging deep enough does find reliable sources (e.g. ) which suggest that the individual passes WP:GNG.  Quasar G  t - c 13:06, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep agree with and the article passes GNG. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:08, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Restore Redirect to the show, Flip or Flop; the article is promotional with content such as "The couple leads Success Path Education" (ext link to commercial web site), etc. I also note that Tarek El Moussa is now a redirect to the show, per Articles for deletion/Tarek El Moussa from 2015. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:56, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment remember WP:OTHERSTUFF, and a bit of promotional material does not warrant deletion.  Quasar G   t - c
 * Clarification: The subject lacks individual notability, apart from the show; hence my "Restore redirect" iVote. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:39, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - Still is not notable. She is famous for her role on one show, which nearly doesn't meet notability criteria per WP:ENTERTAINER, -  Galatz Talk  23:46, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:18, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep There's some data to support the claim. Christina's individual notability has increased outside of the show. 'Flip or Flop' on Google Trends shows top 'related searches' are 'Flip or Flop Christina', 'Christina El Moussa', 'Christina' (Source: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=flip%20or%20flop ). The data shows when people are searching for the show, they follow up to learn more about Christina specifically. Google Trends data also shows a spike in searches for her around the same dates of her divorce. The data supports that her notability and her celebrity status has increased outside of her show and users are interested in learning more about her personal life and background. There's also articles about her personal life written from sources such as 'People', showing increased notability. That's why I'm proposing a 'keep'.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jocean4 (talk • contribs) 03:11, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I also agree with and yes, the article passes GNG. Deathlibrarian (talk) 05:40, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep being on the cover of People magazine gives the presumption of notability. Power~enwiki (talk) 07:59, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak keep or Redirect to Flip or Flop, no need to create a redlink, and the show, such as it is, confers adequate notability.  Montanabw (talk) 10:37, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Do I think she should be notable? no. Is she notable? yes. The sheer amount of Google-news hits (and skimming over them) - confers notability. Reality TV stars gain notability with time - and what was true in 2015 (AFD - two years into the show), is not true in 2017.Icewhiz (talk) 08:56, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep As it currently stands, the reliable and verifiable sources about her support the claim of notability. Alansohn (talk) 20:37, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. She's now hot in the celeb press, in addition to everything else. 2600:1002:B111:2A77:D4BC:601B:1BEE:35FF (talk) 01:38, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: Zero interest to me personally, but the sources are sufficient to meet our notability guidelines. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:24, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article needs a lot of work, but AfD isn't cleanup and notability is there.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   02:37, 21 May 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.