Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Pullman Standish


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 02:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Jane Pullman Standish

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There was some news coverage for her wedding, but there's inadequate sourcing regarding the subject herself to establish notability at this time. The sources are short blurbs, not the kind of in-depth coverage you'd like to see in order to establish notability. Diannaa (talk) 01:13, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Note this is one of the articles listed at Sockpuppet investigations/AustralianThreston. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  01:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete The coverage of her wedding is one lines in articles on larger topics and tweets. Nothing here rises to the level of notability. This seems largely designed to make T.R. Threston seem more important.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:36, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Probably qualifies under WP:CSD as having been created by a member of this sock farm. The sources listed are likely all hoaxes: quickly created websites publishes solely for the purpose of adding credibility to this and the other articles created by the sock farm.  The "Harris Charitable Trust" doesn't appear to exist on anyone's radar, but it has honored all of the subjects of this sock farm.  Similarly, the Social Network of New York seems to exist only through its own postings in various online forums.  No serious coverage exist of the network. Similarly for The Pullman Trust: no sources can be found other than social network postings to verify the existence of this organization.  Pullman is surely a socialite, and managed to get her name mentioned in an article about flash weddings, but that seems to be the only legitimate coverage available.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:20, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Other then being mentioned once by an ABCNews report who was quoting a tweet, all these sources are to social media or user-submitted content. I see no evidence that she, her father, or the Pullman trust actually exist. Choess (talk) 12:36, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per above & Mainly WikiDan61 - All created by a sock who prefers promoting non notable people. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  13:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: I fail to see the relevance with respect to an encyclopedia here, intel on who went to her wedding reads like taken from yellow-press and does not belong, I also highly suspect it being a product of that sockpuppet-zoo around "AustralianThreston", since the article was initiated by one of it's suspected underlings. LagondaDK (talk) 13:57, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per WikiDan61.   Jim Carter (from public cyber)  17:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete all: After the recent update of LagondaDK on his Talk page I suggest ALL of the "articles" listed on Sockpuppet investigations/AustralianThreston as part of the sockpuppet network should be speedy-deleted. I think, this is proof enough, that there is not a single one, which is NOT a hoax or at least provide fake information.--Susumu (talk) 22:12, 1 August 2014 (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.