Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kat Blaque


 * 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 as no one has at all suggested deleting since this AfD started (NAC). SwisterTwister  talk  06:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Kat Blaque
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is a textbook failure of WP:IMPORTANCE, and also has several exacerbating circumstances pointing towards deletion. Notability guidelines require evidence from reliable independent sources, and of the eleven references for this article, five are self-published videos and one does not mention the source at all (CNN). Of the remaining five sources, an article from “THE LGBT UPDATE” is non-independent and only 54 words, “Awesomely Luvvie” is a self-published blog that fails reliability guidelines, and “Mic.com” is a highly progressive and hence non-independent source. This leaves us with two sources that could plausibly qualify as reliable independent sources: MTV and Huffington Post. Both of these have noticeable political slant and both are considered to be low-quality or “clickbait” websites. As such, the subject must fail notability guidelines. Furthermore, the article appears to have been self-written in violation of WP:AUTO and undisclosed WP:CONFLICT (as evidenced by the inclusion of non public biographical details), the article reads like a resume, and the article is an orphan. PhysicalRemoval (talk) 04:22, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Article could definitely be improved, but there are RS which cover her, which is somewhat interesting, as she is an internet phenomenon. Buzzfeed meninists] article chose a whole bunch of memes and one 10 minute video by Blaque, which it called a "great video" refuting the critique of feminism; The LA Times, did an article in 2014 (shows is not a fleeting phenom) talking about the importance of YouTube as a "lifeline" to the Trans community and about 1/3 of the article is devoted to Blaque. This article from the independent in the UK] shows that Kat Blaque reaches an international audience. I also see nothing to support the nominator's claim that the article is self-published or published by someone with a COI. SusunW (talk) 06:23, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep The article seems sourced and the topic seems somewhat notable. Dimadick (talk) 06:45, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article comfortably makes the case for notability, and the nominator's attempts to wave off reliable sources that they don't like is not on. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 09:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree with above comments. Funcrunch (talk) 14:22, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 14:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 14:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 14:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 14:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 14:17, 5 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - Sufficient sources to pass WP:ANYBIO. Some of these sources are stronger than others: Huffington Post, Pride.com, Upworthy, Independent, LA Times, Bustle, guest on HuffPost Live, The Advocate, The LGBT Update, MTV, Independent Journal. &mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  \\ 14:31, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Was able to find hundreds of secondary sources at . Also, agree with astute analysis by, above. Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:27, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:53, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:53, 8 October 2015 (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.