Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emma Vigeland (2nd nomination)


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Emma Vigeland

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete as nominator Vigeland does not meet notability standards established by WP:ENTERTAINER or WP:GNG. The article only lists four sources, including a dead SF Gate article/video and a user-contributed Medium article. I will remind fans of Vigeland's YouTube content or Twitter punditry that her followers or subscribers do not automatically merit a Wikipedia article. KidAd (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2020 (UTC)


 * DELETE. There are no RS in the article. In case anyone gets confused, the "Hill" sources are links to clips from a web-show hosted by the Hill where the subject of the article has appeared. They are not news reports by the Hill. As there is no RS on this person, it's impossible to write a proper article. There was a clear consensus to delete this page in 2017, and there has been no RS coverage of her since then to justify keeping this time around. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 18:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:22, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:23, 22 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete – Appears to be WP:TOOSOON for Ms. Vigeland. Happy to make it a soft delete in case things change. Missvain (talk) 00:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:MILL and Too soon. I don't see anything she's done other than what thousands of other progressives have done online: criticize leaders of both parties. How does that pass WP:GNG? I don't see a man bites dog case here. Bearian (talk) 17:08, 27 January 2020 (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.