Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katherine Power


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Katherine Power

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. BLP article disguised as a business articles. References are passing mentions, interviews, profiles and a mix of PR. UPE.  scope_creep Talk  21:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC) * Delete None of the references on the page talk about him beyond a passing mention. Fails WP:SIGCOV.AndrewYuke (talk) 12:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC) - strike sock - Beccaynr (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, Fashion,  and California.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:14, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment  Delete - possible abuse of platform: It very much reads like PR as per your comments. I was looking for authorship (which I cannot find due to a redirect - and I am a new editor so if you could help in that regard - thanks) the article "feels" like WP:COI or paid pr.  Of interest to me was the Special-purpose acquisition company which would be reliant on marketing.   It was also disconcerting that disclaimers can be found on possible supporting sources " This journal may receive a share from purchases made via links on this page. Every item is independently selected by the Journal Shopping team. Prices and availability are subject to change."  Perhaps the article could be tagged with an advertising template Flibbertigibbets (talk) 22:36, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 * OK.. all the aforementioned articles and related articles were created by a blocked paid editor UPE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Timtempleton
 * and I also see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Timtempleton (where you discussed this issue in overview).
 * Just looking at the Katherine Power article there are several other articles that overlap and were written in synergy (to act together as marketing). Then there are "single use accounts" which hide a coordinated effort https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Koreil2 and here we are again https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Clique_Brands&action=history  and then press releases related to the SPAC.  As a new editor, and user of Wikipedia I would say we are looking at an abuse of the platform. I would say "Delete" or at the least tag every related article. Just let me know what you want to do (and what is appropriate) I will help you in that effort.  Flibbertigibbets (talk) 00:04, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:BUSINESSPERSONOUTCOME, Biographical material on heads and key figures of smaller companies which are themselves the subject of Wikipedia articles are sometimes merged into those articles and the biographies redirected to the company, and there does not appear to be much beyond WP:PROMO to merge and my own search has not found more to add. E.g. one of the most-cited references is a 2016 NYT interview, without secondary context; the other most-cited reference (at one point misattributed as Business Insider in the article) is a 2016 Forbes article summarizing a podcast interview; there is also a brief 2018 Business Insider article that has two grafs of non-interview content about the development of her career. The 2020 WWD article is also mostly an interview, with 7 sentences of non-interview content about her career; the 2021 FastCompany article includes promotional quotes, links to purchase products, and prices, as well as a two-graf overview of her career; the 2015 HuffPost article is totally interview. I searched for book reviews beyond the 2009 Instyle capsule in the article but only found a 2016 Cultured Vultures review (e.g. "The Career Code is a book that holds platitudes of practical advice."), so WP:AUTHOR notability does not appear supported. The creator of the article removed a link to a 2020 Vox article that mentions Power indirectly in an image caption and discusses Who What Wear directly, and does not seem to add support for notability. For the option of a redirect, this BLP makes it appear as if Clique Brands and Who What Wear are separately notable entities, but Who What Wear was a brand within Clique Brands, so Clique Brands seems to be the most appropriate redirect target. Beccaynr (talk) 00:30, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I have done a little work looking into Powers, and put some additional sources into the article. On the one hand I understand 's argument about WP:BUSINESSPERSONOUTCOME; on the other hand there are quite a few articles mentioning Power which may add up to WP:BASIC. However, I would like to investigate further to make sure the sources are independent of her companies as there could be a circular set of citations (a company owned by Power, talking about Power, being used to support notability of Power here in WP). In other words, no conclusive delete/keep from me yet, but a promise for more to come. DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I think the best three sources are the Wall Street Journal article available in ProQuest, the Forbes article, and the Insider article. From these I have pulled what details I could find about Power. I have also trimmed the article down quite a bit to make the focus on her and not the various brands she has been involved in. Given that she has founded multiple businesses with an on-line basis, it's perhaps not surprising that she has a strong public relations presence on-line. I think given the top three (and ignoring all the interviews, of which there are many), I think this is Weak keep. That being said, I can be convinced of a redirect to Clique Brands. DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:32, 22 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment It is a generally a seven day Afd, although it can go on longer if consensus is needed. Lets look at the references:
 * Ref 1 PR. Advertising piece.
 * Ref 2 This is an interview. It is WP:PRIMARY.
 * Ref 3 This is an interview. PR. Its is WP:PRIMARY
 * Ref 4 Another interview. WP:PRIMARY
 * Ref 5 Business news. Acquitistions fails WP:CORPDEPTH.
 * Ref 7 It is a PR piece. It is WP:PRIMARY, from their advertising budget.
 * Ref 8 A discussion of the busines.
 * Ref 9 Another interview. WP:PRIMARY
 * Ref 10 PR.
 * Ref 11 Same reference as above. Same photographs. Likely a press-release, PR
 * Ref 12 Passing mention. Name is mentioned.
 * Ref 13 Press-release, PR.
 * Ref 14 Cameron Diaz and entrepreneur Katherine Power. Examination of clean wine. Not related to this BLP.

The rest of the refs are becoming progressively dissaociated from the subject.She is a business women with an advertsing budget she has used extensively to promote her business. Lots of business coverage promoting the business failing WP:PROMO. No WP:SECONDARY sources to verify she is notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV.  scope_creep Talk  12:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per Scope Creep's analysis of sources. I am not particularly convinced that Power's associated companies, Clique Brands and Who What Wear, are particularly notable either and they should probably be nominated for deletion as well. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:28, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SNOW and above discussion. I have a real problem with "40 under 40" made-up lists. They don't really convey notability, but get in the way of real sources. In 2022, everyone knows we are not a web host, nor are we primarily a social media app. Bearian (talk) 15:30, 22 November 2022 (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.