Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugenie Niarchos


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 03:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Eugenie Niarchos

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable individual lacking GNEWS and GHits of substance. Appears to fail WP:BIO.  ttonyb (talk) 05:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 10:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm going to throw my hat in the "keep" ring for a change. I'll concede notability on the basis of non trivial mention in The New York Times and Vogue. -- Oliver  Twisted (Talk) (Stuff) 06:19, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

I vote Keep. She's a notable jewelry designer and the article has good references. --ACRSM 22:19, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete. She is moderately famous but is she notable? As a jewelry designer I would say not to justify more than the brief mention in Repossi (what NY Times ref is about), and where "Czarina" content can be merged. Her fame is in most part inherited from her grandfather/family (see Time Mag ref about shipping). Refs 1,5 are quite trivial (best dressed lists), and even Vogue Paris is in the same broad category but longer (only saw web copy though). Is she notable as a socialite for the way she dresses? Not really convinced, but maybe there is potential for increased future performance in this area (only reason for "weak" non-vote). Antipastor (talk) 16:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - no substantial coverage, no evidence of actual notability. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  00:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. The hits and sources in the article are trivial mentions. Notability is not equal to fame. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  14:44, 16 October 2009 (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.