Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Bardales (2nd nomination)


 * 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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 10:50, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Lady Bardales
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The one source we have is very tabloidish, centered around rumors and very negative coverage of a photo. This may have passed muster back in 2005 a year before we started developing the concept of notability, it does not now. Other coverage is equally tabloidish. Her actual claim to notability may not be any more questionable than some others we have articles on, but it is not very well sourced and other sources tend to run even more into tabloids than the source we have. Beyond this since Bardales is a living person, we have higher standards on the article than on those of the deceased John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Peru-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:15, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep- She seems well known enough in Peru to have her engagement be reported about. We do need more sources however. Antonio the Lady's Lover Martin (si?) 11:55, May 25, 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:29, 29 May 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per nom. Mccapra (talk) 12:28, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. She seems to have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable sources over an extended period. 2005 (Peru),2005 (US),2008 (Peru),2008 (New Zealand),2009 (Peru),2013 (Peru),2019 (Peru). pburka (talk) 20:23, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:25, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * leaning delete Based on the information in the article, I would go for outright deletion, as there is no claim to notability other than that now provided by some sourcing. Looking at the English-language sources, there's intimation of a more interesting story which would justify the article, but that story isn't what's in the article, and I do not trust machine translation to get me a better picture here. But without improvement, I can't see keeping this. Mangoe (talk) 02:36, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep for the reasons of those who want this article kept. Davidgoodheart (talk) 03:39, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, sources do not have to be in English to contribute to notability, the Peruvian sources are reliable, and they cause her to pass GNG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:40, 9 June 2020 (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.