Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyclone Dyonne


 * 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. Little to no sourcing showing she passes WP:GNG, what does exist is tabloid-esque coverage that doesn't pass WP:RS. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Cyclone Dyonne

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only junior pageant wins, temporary tabloid coverage due to a  scandal Atlantic306 (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2017 (UTC) Details of other pageant wins have been added but seem minor pageants. Atlantic306 (talk) 13:57, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Nominator has claimed only junior pageant wins which is false, and referencing included from mainstream newspapers and not tabloid scandal as suggested. It should be noted that the page is still being developed and to nominate a page for deletion within 24 hours of being created, defies logic and goes against the principals of why wikipaedia ws created for. Furthermore the nominator is not an authority in terms of knowledge of the subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ekhaya2000 (talk • contribs) 09:47, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Reach Out to the Truth 02:06, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Zimbabwe-related deletion discussions. Reach Out to the Truth 02:06, 4 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - almost no references online. a couple articles where she is mentioned in passing. a couple blogs where source appears to be Facebook. does not meet notability criteria.Glendoremus (talk) 18:44, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:40, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Negligible RS coverage as a model. Main RS coverage comes from alleged relationship with a prominent rapper. This is a biography of one event with any biographical depth largely unsourced. • Gene93k (talk) 21:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:47, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete NOW: No notability even for one event and potentially libelous. Coverage concerning supposed breakup scandal is about the principles involved (“Stunner” and Olinda) and mention of "the possibility" of some person named Dionne, which was and is still confused with Dion Chasa, and is speculation at best. "The Standard" reference "claims" Dyonne Tafirenyika to be "unmasked" as the real mistress but only makes unsubstantiated assertions. This is tabloid reporting, The "Pressreader" reference from "The Harold (Zimbabwe)" is titled Makaye in international beauty glory and is more credible for advancing that pageant participants are internationally recognized as models than notability of the subject. The reference Pindula is still about Stunner and Olinda. The Zimbuzz reference does not support a Cyclone Dyonne but is a list of participants of a "Zimbabwe Models Award" presentation and the closest name to Dyonne Tanaka Tafirenyika on the list is Deyonne Tafirenyika, that may or may not even be the right person.


 * Article title name:Cyclone Dyonne joins other titles such as Cyclone Jasmine, Cyclone Alessia, Cyclone Tasha, Cyclone Althea, and many others, EXCEPT; this article title has no source for the name and is certainly not about a tropical storm. We can not change the title of Donald Trump to "The Idiot" because he might have been referred to as such in a reference.
 * We have the wrong title name, that is certainly ambiguous anyway, tabloid references, and an article without a lead, because the small amount of content (one good paragraph at best) was separated into one line sections (one section with a line and a half) that is so confusing that a lead can not be formulated from content. I have just spent more time researching a non-notable and wrongly titled article, using almost as much content doing so as the article currently supports, to show there is nothing notable about a fictitious tropical storm named Cyclone Dyonne. IF more editors could be active when these articles are created they would be speedily deleted and the creators reprimanded for creating potentially libelous wanna-be pseudo-biographies, because I have given evidence why the article should be immediately deleted. Does anyone else not see that a jilted ex- calling someone a name, and an article being created from this, as libelous? Is this not a great example of how not to have and allow horribly named and referenced BLP articles (the references can't even figure out the right name), that in this case violate other policies and guidelines, on Wikipedia. Someone should blank this article until it is deleted. Otr500 (talk) 09:33, 11 April 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.