Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Fernanda Londoño


 * 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.  So Why  20:06, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Maria Fernanda Londoño

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:TOOSOON fails to establish WP:N. red dogsix (talk) 17:35, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - Subject lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Meatsgains (talk) 17:40, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:41, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:41, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep subject has substantial coverage in the richmond, VA area.   If desired, the rest of the tags can be removed. For the Richmond, VA area, there is substantial coverage from independent reliable resources on this person. Furthermore there are substantial hits with the subject name and the word fashion . Wikifash (talk) 17:49, 13 June 2017 (UTC)user:wikifashWikifash (talk) 17:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Wikifash (talk • contribs)  is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.  — Wikifash (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment - There are only 42 Ghits for "Maria Fernanda Londoño" and the word "fashion." 130 for "Maria Fernanda Londoño" and 172 pages for the search you cited. Go to the bottom of the last page of the search for the real number.
 * Comment Avoid criteria based on search engine statistics (e.g. Google hits or Alexa ranking), or measuring the number of photos published online. The adult film industry, for example, uses Googlebombing to influence rankings,[13] and for most topics search engines cannot easily differentiate between useful references and mere text matches. For example, while the Alexa Toolbar is useful, its utility is limited by its userbase (numbers and willingness) and by data scarcity (less data tends to raise error margins). When using a search engine to help establish the notability of a topic, evaluate the quality, not the quantity, of the links. --- The QUALITY of the links/hits referenced are enough to distinguish notability
 * Comment Maria's work has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition at [The Valentine] and the [VMFA]Wikifash (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:19, 13 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Neither her nor her "brand" appear to be sufficiently notable. Best coverage we do have appear to stem from her university days, in a school fashion show. As the nominator says, may well just be a case of too soon. She is not a notable fashion designer, for our purposes, at this time. Delete. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - According to notability guidelines, "too soon" is not a reason to delete an article (note above comment: evaluate the quality, not the quantity, of the links.) Of course her recognition comes mostly from school, according to the article she just graduated last year- therefore she is an emerging designer and although her brand is not yet widely recognized, this should not deflect from the ample amount of local coverage her work has gotten. This discussion is not about an article for her brand but about an article about Maria as a fashion designer in the Richmond, VA area. 204.63.44.145 (talk) 19:46, 13 June 2017 (UTC) 204.63.44.145 (talk) 19:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC) — 204.63.44.145 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Well, "too soon" is the perhaps the nominator and myself being kind. She's not notable now and you have not offered a shred of policy based reasoning why she is. The minor local coverage she netted while a student is not sufficient to meet WP:GNG. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:00, 13 June 2017 (UTC) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:58, 13 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete fails gng Number of Ghits not a measure of notability. Lacks significant coverage in RS. Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:00, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 03:35, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Coverage listed is either unreliable, local, or firsthand/primary. Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. Note that the only keep arguments are from SPAs and not based in policy. czar  19:10, 29 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.