Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fiona Scott Lazareff


 * 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:14, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Fiona Scott Lazareff

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable, simply a run of the mill business person. Article has history of being created and maintained by COI socks. Please note that there is another magazine titled Boulevard Lyndaship (talk) 18:40, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, ZI Jony (talk) 19:58, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, ZI Jony (talk) 19:58, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, ZI Jony (talk) 19:58, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Management-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, ZI Jony (talk) 19:58, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Warm Regards, ZI Jony (talk) 19:58, 25 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. I'm sad her son died, but lots of kids die annually from intoxication. Her connection to his death does not make her notable. All other sources are skimpy at best. Sorry. Bearian (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete this covert advertising. MER-C 18:26, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - non-notable individual; not notable enough an author (WP:NAUTHOR), a run of the mill businesswoman (business success is not an innately notable indicator of notability), and relatively unremarkable philanthropist. The article subject has been referenced by some sources, even to the point of appearing in a BBC documentary, but none of these sources are in-depth, indicating a WP:SIGCOV failure. In addition, the good-quality sources cited by the article do not really assert a claim to significance for Lazareff, which is an issue as Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.--SamHolt6 (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2018 (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.