Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katie McHugh


 * 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. Despite the sources mentioned later, consensus is that this person does not meet the notability guidelines at this point.  So Why  07:11, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Katie McHugh

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As far as I can tell (and find) she's only 'famous' for being fired a few days ago. Doesn't meet the notability criteria, and there's also WP:NOTNEWS.  Y intan  07:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:55, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:58, 6 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Only notable for being fired and tweeting about it. Other than that she's just a run of the mill racist, one of many. Neiltonks (talk) 12:42, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. She wasn't notable before she was fired; she's not notable now that she has been. — D. Wo. 13:29, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. If necessary to document, should be noted on Breitbart page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironpaw (talk • contribs) 14:01, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm not sure her firing is even notable enough to be mentioned on the Breitbart page.--Calton | Talk 14:16, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:ONEEVENT. There is almost no coverage of her in reliable sources prior to her termination.- MrX 14:26, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Her accomplishments and background do not merit a BLP. Most of the sources are self-published, irrelevant, and verging on tabloid. Per the standards: Wikipedia is not news, or an indiscriminate collection of information. Being in the news does not in itself mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article. . — Mrpabesteves 15:52, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. !Votes based on the argument that McHugh is only notable for being recent fired by Breitbart should be disregarded since they're verifiably incorrect. Here are some reliable sources with significant pre-firing coverage:
 * --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging, , , , , and in case they wish to opine on my research. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but on review, I stand by my original comment. Raw Story is not a very good source. The other sources only mention the subject in passing and lack and meaningful biographical detail.- MrX 18:03, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I second that. I just don't think there's enough in depth coverage of her. Neiltonks (talk) 11:58, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Nope. My decision stands; nothing really there. --Calton | Talk 01:18, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging, , , , , and in case they wish to opine on my research. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but on review, I stand by my original comment. Raw Story is not a very good source. The other sources only mention the subject in passing and lack and meaningful biographical detail.- MrX 18:03, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I second that. I just don't think there's enough in depth coverage of her. Neiltonks (talk) 11:58, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Nope. My decision stands; nothing really there. --Calton | Talk 01:18, 10 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete -- I reviewed the sources listed above and I don't believe that, collectively, they represent SIGCOV. They are passing mentions mostly confirming the subject's position at Breibart and that she indeed holds racist views. However, the totality of coverage does not convince me that the subject has encyclopedia notability just yet. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:57, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:58, 7 June 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.