Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mery Racauchi


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:14, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Mery Racauchi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Time to establish whether or not this person is sufficiently notable to have a page in Wikipedia. I'm not seeing it: she gets no verifiable hits on Gbooks, about 38 on Gnews. Of those, a good proportion are press releases, or crap sources such as the Daily Fail; I'm not convinced that there's enough among the remainder to justify having an article. The page has been blatant WP:COI/WP:PAID editing from the outset; it's already been moved three times to draft space (twice by me), and there seems to be little point in doing that again. The draft has never been submitted for independent review. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 19:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete fails WP:NMUSIC, WP:NACTOR, and basically any other notability check for their professed accomplishments. All the sources provided are paid/fake PR release sites, I couldn't find a single reliable source that would warrant this person an article on Wikipedia. She does not appear in any of the IMDB entries of the listed films and TV shows where she was supposedly part of the cast (1 2 3 4 5), in fact she does not even possess an IMDB entry, either under her real or stage name. --MewMeowth (talk) 22:32, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as seems to be a promotional entry based on promotional sources. The two singles do not seem to have charted so it seems WP:TOOSOON imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable performer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:53, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The Guardian, RESPECT magazine and Galore Magazine are well-known, reliable sources. A simple search of this person also brings up many articles written to satisfy WP:GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweetteaplz (talk • contribs) 22:59, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The Guardian? There are literally no results when searching for this persons name and The Guardian. --MewMeowth (talk) 00:18, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Apologies, adding the Guardian was a mistake. The other sources hold true though. Upon another search, The Hype Magazine popped up as well. Sweetteaplz (talk) 00:50, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken about the veracity of some of these sources. Galoremag.com is not a reliable source; it is a branding service (see this: .) Hype Magazine offers a pay to play service (see: .) The way to distinguish it from legitimate coverage is in the byline. Paid content is credited to "guest editors," which is the case here. Respect is the only legitimate source among those you are identifying. And even it is a promotional announcement of a release, using PR language. It's not particularly substantive. ShelbyMarion (talk) 18:37, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clarifying but, I recently learned Wikipedia claims reliability of sources fall on a spectrum and editors use their judgement to determine. WP:REPUTABLE Many articles actually use The Hype Magazine as a reliable source I've also found and it's clearly :known. There isn't a way to determine the pay for promo for this particular person. And Flaunt Mag isn't a reliable source as well? Sweetteaplz (talk) 02:02, 24 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete See my above post among the comments with the Keep vote. ShelbyMarion (talk) 18:39, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:22, 24 May 2020 (UTC)


 * delete paid for spam as per my comments at related AFDs. I'm beginning to doubt the integrity of The Source given their covert paid publications without disclaimers. Praxidicae (talk) 17:30, 27 May 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.