Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colette Pervette


 * 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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:34, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Colette Pervette

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Overly promotional article on non notable individual. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Current coverage is primary, non reliable or passing mentions, nothing good for GNG. A search found nothing better. Very recently deleted at Domina Colette for promotion and no indication of notability. Speedy for promotion removed, complete with adhom, by a newly created SPA. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:52, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:52, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:52, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:54, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as very promotional article/advert for the subject and their business interests that is a case of WP:PROMO. Also the subject does not pass WP:BASIC as the references are not independent as either written by the subject or interview with no independent prose; the most reliable source is The NYT but the subject only gets a brief mention which does not verify much at all, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 20:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hang on, I haven't had a chance to respond or revise due to a good ol' California eviction that has taken over my life... I hear what you're saying, I don't necessarily agree although I had planned to revise it some more. Keepin' it real concise. Stay tuned. Olivettilly (talk) 13:18, 23 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Promotional Lubbad85 (talk) 15:04, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as PROMO lacking sources to support notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 07:30, 27 March 2019 (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.