Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LaNiyah Bailey


 * 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 07:38, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

LaNiyah Bailey

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROD removed here with the sole basis of choosing AfD instead, I still confirm my PROD as it still applies and clearly states everything of concerns here. SwisterTwister  talk  21:42, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete article about a 12-year-old that received some attention back when she was 6 for writing a book. Wikipedia is not news, and the coverage is all flashy news coverage.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:54, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:41, 9 October 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment I'm not !voting here, but I'd like to point out two things: 1) the article was vetted through the AfC process. 2) What does "flashy news coverage have to do with anything? Is the source reliable? Is it biased? Just because this is "feel good news" doesn't mean it isn't an RS and flashy coverage may indeed be significant and reliable depending on the subject. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:53, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:09, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. probably, in fact, speedy A7 and G11, both.   promotion by or for a self published author of one book which is less than8 libraries. We never consider this even an indication of significance.  DGG ( talk ) 04:39, 25 October 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.