Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ipa-Nima (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 speedy keep. WP:SK1, nom withdrawal. (non-admin closure) Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:29, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Ipa-Nima
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced and not notable Mccapra (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. –  The Grid  ( talk )  21:49, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. –  The Grid  ( talk )  21:49, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. Matthew hk (talk) 22:25, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Comment Has anything changed to the article since the first AfD? Notability was established in the first AfD. – The Grid  ( talk )  22:16, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment apologies I realised there had been a PROD and an attempted speedy delete before but failed to spot the previous AfD. However I did look for sources myself today and did not find any of the ones referred to in the previous AfD. Maybe there are Vietnamese sources I’m missing. Mccapra (talk) 22:47, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 (talk) 04:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep Did have coverage about her and her brand in an interview in South China Morning Post (included in the previous AfD) the dominant English newspaper in Hong Kong (to bad WSJ Asia edition ceased to publish and no one care China Daily). Despite interview is a primary source and the current state of the wiki article is unsatisfactory. Matthew hk (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   13:45, 7 March 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep The last nomination found significant coverage in reliable sources. Too bad no one expanded the article with them back then.  I'll see what I can do now.   D r e a m Focus  15:47, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I have added in some references to the article and expanded it a bit with what English language sources were found in the previous AFD.  D r e a m Focus  16:01, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:01, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Withdraw nomination. with thanks to other editors who have found and added sources which I believe now support the notability of the topic. Mccapra (talk) 13:39, 14 March 2019 (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.