Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dana Arschin


 * 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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Dana Arschin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Clearly fails WP:NJOURNALIST. The emmy award was not an individual award but one for a broadcast of which she was part of the 11 person team. fails WP:GNG Domdeparis (talk) 18:01, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Of the 12 sources provided 6 are self-published, 1 (daily dot) just says "Editors of News 12 and the reporter, Dana Arschin, who claims to be a “Holocaust Educator,” did not return our requests for comment" and nothing else about her. NYIT is her Alma Marta and so not independent. 1 (greatneckrecord) doesn't mention her but her name appears in a caption for a photo. Another (Brooklyn eagle) is about a business park and not about her and just gives a passing mention at the end of the article. 1 is a podcast from a private college and the last is the list of winners of the NY Emmys that I added myself to clarify the claim of being an Emmy-winning journalist. This is clearly a puff piece for a non-notable young journalist. Domdeparis (talk) 18:20, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:22, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:23, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   18:23, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

*Keep For now at least. She is young and there are quite a few reliable sources that specifically mentions her, or is about her. Not including the plethora of reports by her that come up during the Google News search with her name.--Contactpage (talk) 18:25, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete for now at least. Dearth of coverage about her. Google hits for her reports don't fill the need for independent sourcing. May she one day be notable, but is not now. Dloh cierekim


 * Comment: There are also many Google hits for her videos. Indeed Google hits for her overabundance of reports don't fill the need for independent sourcing, but do provide basis for citation, making her notable another way. BTW independent sourcings do exist --Contactpage (talk) 19:03, 27 April 2017 (UTC) boldly going where Domdeparis has gone before. Dloh  cierekim  15:50, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * please don't hesitate to cite them here and add them to the article it would help to decide the outcome. Domdeparis (talk) 21:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

*Keep I saw her on TV many times.--Pediaorg (talk) 19:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Barely enough coverage to clear WP:GNG, the reason I would say keep is there is probably a lot of tv broadcasts that could be used as sources if they could be made available online. I know this argument is a little WP:CRYSTALy but the sources online seem to just be a shadow of the information on this person released to the public. AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 19:09, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't mean to be rude but that has to be the lamest argument in an Afd discussion I have ever seen...Domdeparis (talk) 21:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Having seen someone on TV does not signify notability. Dloh cierekim  21:46, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

*Keep Enough reliable sources to justify notability, and also her work is significant enough to be covered in highly esteemed magazines/journals.--U2t5h6c9 (talk) 19:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC) — U2t5h6c9 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  23:25, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * !votes struck as all were sockpuppets of the same account that created the page and have been blocked indefinately here. I hope this is appropriate Domdeparis (talk) 15:44, 28 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Being part of an 11 person team that wins a REGIONAL emmy is not at all a sign of notability. Nothing else here even comes remotely close.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:CSD G5, article was written entirely by User:Mangoeater1000 socks. Sro23 (talk) 20:59, 30 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.