Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linda Pinizzotto


 * 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. slakr \ talk / 04:52, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Linda Pinizzotto

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a non-profit organization founder and president, with heavy overtones of promotional as opposed to encyclopedic presentation. As currently constituted, this relies almost entirely on sources in which the subject is briefly quoted giving a comment about something else, and/or invalid primary sources, with not a single source in the entire article in which she's the subject (which is the kind of sourcing it takes to get an encyclopedia article.) She might potentially qualify for a properly written and properly sourced article, but that's not what this is. Delete — redirection to COA Ontario (the organization she leads) might also be acceptable, but that's also a really badly-written and abysmally-sourced advertisement which might also qualify for deletion.) Bearcat (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 02:12, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 02:12, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 17:55, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 17:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Weak keep Agree problems with article but there are numerous sources here, with Pinizzotto (sp) being a substantial voice in politics in Ontario, by organizing a group that represents 1+million condo owners in the most populous Canadian province. In addition, the media see her as an authority on condo real estate, such as here, they publish her views regularly in condo-related discussions in the news media, although I did not come across an article discussing her primarily as a person or player, although this article includes more information about her COA organization. Clearly the current article appears overly long, promotional, and can be trimmed substantially; if kept, I'll try to trim it.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:14, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ⨹   07:52, 26 November 2014 (UTC)



 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Another weak keep The refs could do with being cleaned up a bit, but then it's okay. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 07:07, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 18:05, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete The problem with bad reference styles and "numerous sources" is that you can't tell what weight to give the references that are there. I only had the patience to go through the first 6: #1 does not mention her #2 is a 6 minute interview about condos, not about her #3 a one sentence quote from her on an article about real estate #4 her name on a list #5 a short quote in an article not about her #6 quotes from her about a proposed law, not about her. In a brief scan of the first few pages of the "numerous sources" not one appears to be about her, and I assume that they all have short quotes. That she is quoted about her area of expertise in local real estate is not GNG, IMO. LaMona (talk) 00:59, 10 December 2014 (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.