Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lia Montelongo (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 delete WP:SNOW and WP:BLP, a compelling combination. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JzG (talk • contribs)

Lia Montelongo
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

1) simply not notable

2) Lacks any solid independent sourcing

3) Has been an attractive nuisance to the subject for some four years. Used for harrassment and multiple BLP violations. See this ANI thread for full details

Different reasons here will appear to different people - the net result ought to be delete and salt. Scott Mac (Doc) 02:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia should not be a platform for harassment.  Four years of socking and harassment are too much.  Borderline notability, which is a guideline and not a principle.  Common sense and humanitarian concerns should guide this decision.  Durova  412 02:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per nom. -- Nuujinn (talk) 02:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as failing WP:BIO. Google news archive shows only one press mention: . No independent references in the article. I do not go along necessarily with deleting a bio article because someone persistently vandalized it orp posted inappropriate material in it: we have the ability to protect an article and to block offenders. No one should be empowered to get a biography of a notable person deleted by vandalizing it persistently. This one deos not really seem to satisfy WP:BIO. Edison (talk) 02:40, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is very unlikely that this vandal's goal was to get the biography deleted. Wikipedia has limited volunteer resources to manage a persistent harassment campaign of this duration.  Durova  412 02:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. While we shouldn't delete solidly notable BLPs based on real-world issues, it's fine to evaluate marginally notable BLPs based on their real-world impact. In this case, we lose very little by overlooking the subject, and potentially harm them by keeping the article. — Gavia immer (talk) 03:07, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Insufficient coverage found. While we know her work from IMDb and such, there is virtually no substantial coverage of her outside of that. From reliable sources, there simply isn't enough to write a reasonably detailed article. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:27, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not anyway notable per our various biography inclusion criteria.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 04:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Durova and ANI thread. -- &oelig; &trade; 04:36, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Durova hits the nail on the head. Barely notable and a frequent target for harassment. This is one of those cases where deletion is the morally correct thing to do. AniMate  04:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt - Per nom, Durova, ANI thread. Not much else to say, we aren't myspace, and we certainly aren't some soapbox for a stalker to harass someone.—  Dæ  dαlus Contribs 05:50, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note to the closing administrator I have just received an e-mail from Lia after notifying her of this debate and the closer of this thread might want to look over it before doing anything. Let it be known that she supports the deletion of her page, but I think a word from her here might be in order. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 06:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Having done a bit of reading on celebrity stalking, it is probably better if she doesn't post here. Celebrity stalkers crave vicarious contact with their targets.  So let's close the door on this person firmly and politely, to the best of our ability.  Durova  412 06:24, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I notified her, too, and got a reply indicating that she's fine with the article being deleted. Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per wishes of subject and prior persistent misuse of the article as an attack platform. 66.127.52.47 (talk) 06:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per Durova. BLP of borderline-at-best notability with a vandal/real life harasser and the subject has no issues with it being deleted, this should be open and shut. Seth Kellerman (talk) 07:08, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Wording like "romantically involved with" and information about competion in fitness championships are not required in at Wikipedia. Johnuniq (talk) 07:46, 17 April 2010 (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.