Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ms. Pat


 * 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 keep. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 20:59, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Ms. Pat

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No independent sources.

In the end, this is promotion of a comedian, and it can't be accepted due to there being zero independent sources, listed, or that I was able to find. Other sources out there are no better than the list five. Three of the five are youtube link. One the the subjects own website, which is also listed as an external link in the infobox. Only one source (https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/how-ms-pat-overcame-drugs-prison-and-abuse--and-rose-to-comedy/2017/08/17/ad1d2684-80fd-11e7-902a-2a9f2d808496_story.html?noredirect=on) comes close, but it is clearly not independent of the subject, and worse, it is largely serving to promote the subject. It may not be a paid advertisement, but it is an advertisement.

The topic includes some touching personal details, self-published, and some good messaging, but WP:NOT applies to this sort of thing. SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:35, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:46, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:46, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Keep. She has her own TV show coming to Hulu according this article from Playbill:, and she was profiled here in USA Today. That with The Washington Post article, which is independent of the subject, establishes notability per WP:GNG. Here are a few other reviews to boot:, , .4meter4 (talk) 02:55, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
 * (1) Playbill . Name drop, says nothing about Ms. Pat. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:10, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * (2) Profiled USA Today . Yes, seems good coverage. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:13, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * (3) Leoweekly. . Straight interview, non-independent promotion, promoting the next show ($25). No. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * (4) Indy Star Maybe a couple of twitches this is promoting upcoming shows and a book, but I think this is good.  Yes. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * (5) KUT interview. . Not independent, doesn’t attest notability itself, but may be a good source. The print component is negligible. No. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:23, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Mixed source selection, 4meter4. I need to review them again later. #2 and #4 may be sufficient to Keep. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 14:26, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep USA Today, The Washington Post sources mentioned already , Flare (magazine) (there is a part before the interview that is indepth), NUVO (newspaper) , a paragraph on The New York Times , San Antonio Express-News , and a coverage in a magazine  make her pass WP:BASIC with multiple significant coverage in reliable sources. Plus, if her Hulu pilot gets a series order, there is another possible venue of coverage right there. Not to mention the coverage/reviews related to her book , , , , . Jovanmilic97 (talk) 15:56, 4 October 2019 (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.