Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juliette Longuet


 * 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) 22:21, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Juliette Longuet

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Advertisement. There may be some notability here, but the basic principle of WP:NOT is that we do not include promotion, regardless of the possible notability or importance. I see no way of improving the promotionalism from this article without removing the basic content. Examples of promotionalism : continual use of adjectives of praise, extensive name-dropping, and uncited statements like  "Longuet decided that she was in need of a new adventure" ; "Her use of ... creates an ultra feminine look with European sensibility" "She began freelancing with the magazine in 2011 where she shares her secret addresses around the world and her favorite products". "Her overall mission is to bring forth well-rounded awareness strategically and creatively to luxury brands,"-- all this would be more than a little excessive even on her own web site--puffery of this sort is singularly unconvincing.

and I see no clear evidence of notability -- most of the references are from her own web site or written by her or author blurbs, and the rest are mostly notices or press releases.  DGG ( talk ) 00:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Regardless of the article's quality, puffery belongs to fashion. For notability, you may consider this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.73.134.206 (talk) 07:03, 28 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Overly promotional article on a non-notable figure in the fashion industry.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:24, 28 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete: this does look to be purely promotional, both in tone and in content. This impression is reinforced by the editing history: the article was created and many times edited by an SPA, then briefly by a second SPA, then by a user named JulietteLonguet, now blocked. Notability is not established, either within the article or on the Internet. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:12, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Puffery and usage of adjectives of praise do belong in fashion (also stated above), therefore the commentary and description of a figure within the industry in that manner is necessary. This article is solely speaking of Longuet in a way in which others within the industry do, therefore is not "purely" promotional via content. As for tone, any article speaking of any public figure's successes and career titles should do so in the same, praiseful manner. Praise does not necessarily have to equal to promotion and advertisement. This article and its various notable references serve as no violation to WP's principles, and should therefor be removed from a deletion consideration. Cprosper1(talk) 00:50, 31 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Overly promotional, but delete as non-notable; the only possible demonstration of notability is via Forbes, and even that was written by a contributor, not a staff writer/editor. ("Forbes" is a community content platform.) JSFarman (talk) 17:01, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:10, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 08:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - either on the grounds of not passing WP:GNG, or as an advertisement. Either way, doesn't belong here.  Onel 5969  TT me 21:07, 4 April 2017 (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.