Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marisa Anderson


 * 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. Tone 16:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Not notable, sources are all peers, edits done by Marisa Anderson herself, mostly an advertisement for her services. JCipriani (talk) 01:24, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete There may be a weak case for notability here given the things alleged about her in the article. Unfortunately the sources appear to be compromised by personal and or professional association with the subject. Both WP:RS and WP:V seem to be a fail. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:38, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Take away the self-promotional and fringe-sourced stuff; there's nothing left that meets WP:GNG. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Reads like an advertisement. Can not find any reliable references. Goblin Face (talk) 02:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Very weak delete I deleted most of the WP:NOAD violating material. There isn't that much left. She's had enough media exposure that if non-fringe WP:RS could be found to confirm her notability I might support a keep however if it can't be improved beyond where it is I'd say delete. After noting that the Holzer reference was actually an advertising directory and that the information contending her having an ongoing professional relationship was impossible on account of him being 5 years dead I found one reliable source (which I included) to support that the Grave's End "haunting" spoke toward a notable event - however weakly. However WP:BLP1E applies now as this event is all that is left. So while it speaks to notability it isn't sufficient on its own. Simonm223 (talk) 18:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete The only remaining section "Work with Hans Holzer" suggests that Anderson is not independently notable as per WP:INHERITED. Kooky2 (talk) 11:03, 27 February 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.