Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cynthia Sakai


 * 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. Closing early per WP:SNOW with a clear consensus to keep, and also due to the high likelihood of this being a bad faith nomination. KaisaL (talk) 00:58, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Cynthia Sakai
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Largely unsourced, over the top entry, too promotional to save. Cannot find enough sources to assert she is absolutely notable to begin with either. Baum des Lichtes (talk) 16:43, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 July 3.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 17:03, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 17:11, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article is written like an advertisement and I am not sure the individual is notable enough for an article. Best, Mifter (talk) 01:06, 4 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep: The article is very poor quality and is, indeed, written worse than a bad press release, but the most cursory of google searches brings up multiple independent, third-party sources in addition to what's in the article:, , , , , . The WP:NEWSBLOG feature by Neiman-Marcus alone establishes notability.  Montanabw (talk)  18:29, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: Poorly written is not a reason for deletion. A minimal amount of work to do WP:BEFORE would have, as Montanabw pointed out brought up many independent RS, showing that she is indeed a reputable designer and was nominated as a member of the Council of Fashion Designers of America. In addition to those Montanabw found are:, , SusunW (talk) 18:54, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep and  have found several RS that show the subject passes GNG. Again, as they mentioned, we don't delete articles based on the quality of writing. I personally think Wiki is better served fixing problems you find as you find them, but that's my way of editing and not everyone has to do things on Wiki the same way. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:12, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep there are lots and lots of mentions in web and news sources. They are not the greatest mentions, in that they are quite thin, but this is what fashion reporting is like. The mentions are numerous enough that I have zero problems with keeping an article on her here.HappyValleyEditor (talk) 03:28, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep, but it's really chatty Kathy. I'm going to hack at it a bit. Bearian (talk) 18:56, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – Per all the above.VictoriaGraysonTalk 23:29, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep This article subject passes WP:GNG. I do vote for Bearian to hack it up a bit. Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant  23:33, 7 July 2016 (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.