Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivana Raymonda van der Veen (3rd 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Ivana Raymonda van der Veen
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable singer. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. WP:MUSIC#12 is not met, it is about major national FTA networks, not small community cable station and the programs should be about her not just a basic compilation of home made videos. Charting is not met, all claimed charting is on bad charts. None of the awards are major. The views of this page may look nice but don't make for notability. Coverage is a bombardment of minor mentions, non reliable sources and primary sources, none good for WP:GNG. Last AFD had a clear concensus that she was not notable but was procedurally closed due pointy behavior and disruption. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Rebb  ing  16:20, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions.  Rebb  ing  16:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)


 * delete per nom, whose assessment I concur with. There is one RS in the whole thing: a review (which gave her 5/10). The other substantive-looking content is an interview, but it's on a personal blog (on a neglected WordPress that appears to serve pharma spam to Google Translate). There's tremendous amounts of puffery and nothing of substance - David Gerard (talk) 17:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per DEL8 and FAILN as the subject does not appear to be notable. The only qualifying significant, reliable, independent coverage I could locate is the cited Washington City Paper review, and that is not nearly enough. The subject also does not appear to meet any of the special BAND criteria; even if she did, I would likely find notability to be lacking on account of the paucity of coverage. As an aside, I disagree with the nominator's characterization of the previous discussion—a characterization soundly rejected at DRV. Rebb  ing  21:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Rubbish. None of my above assertions above about the last AfD were rejected at DRV. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:10, 23 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:BAND. This is probably the best coverage I could find; the source itself is a blog on the website and I'm hesitant to use these for GNG due to the potential for promotion. Considering that there is literally no other independent sources and the subject doesn't pass WP:BAND either, I will go with a delete. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 10:40, 20 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete as does not meet enough of the GNG criteria. I looked at the previous AfDs and it looks like there is a major self-promotion problem here. The source is solid enough, but states, "a very thin, very blond pop singer who has about 35,000 YouTube subscribers and clearly would prefer to be more famous than that."  Kind of sums it up.   Montanabw (talk) 05:01, 25 September 2016 (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.