Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jayne Pierson


 * 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 Keep (NAC). SwisterTwister  talk  04:50, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Jayne Pierson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Outside of a few press releases and posts made by small blogs, there's not much coverage of the subject. The references in the article focus on other people and only mention the subject in passing. In short, there's no clear indication of notability. Elaenia (talk) 04:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  13:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07  ( T ) 22:16, 17 March 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep She has enough coverage in her home country of Wales to pass GNG. I am not as familiar with Fashion subjects, but I noticed that her collection is listed in Vogue annually and added the link to her Vogue Timeline in the external link section. The article is a mess, and I didn't do a lot of clean up, I just added my information where it seemed to fit. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 00:14, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:28, 24 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. There are enough sources discussing the subject in enough depth to establish notability. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:25, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Per Aymatth2, kudos to for her excellent work on it.♦  Dr. Blofeld  15:37, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:57, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article has now been substantially improved.--Ipigott (talk) 16:32, 28 March 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.