Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nancy Marshall


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  16:15, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Nancy Marshall

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A very adverty article whose subject does not have significant independent coverage in reliable sources, although as the head of a small PR firm, there's a lot of trivial coverage of the subject and coverage that quotes the subject. Marshall has won an award conferred by the Kennebec Valley Chamber of Commerce, which does not seem to me to be enough to meet WP:ANYBIO. Does not meet WP:GNG. signed,Rosguill talk 05:39, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:17, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:19, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * (Article author) My vote is to Keep the page because she's a Forbes columnist, and often goes on the record. Plus, having a PR podcast that's well-regarded is no small feat. It seems to be enough for at least a basic page. Doctorstrange617 (talk) 20:27, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as PROMO. She's one of an enormous stable of unpaid, unedited, Forbes "columnists", who, like the volunteer columnists at HuffPost, are more like bloggers than paid opinion columnists.  Fails WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:19, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. The lede says it all "She has advised the Maine Office of Tourism, Maine Office of Business Development".  The refs either don't mention her, are from very localized sources (which she is acting as PR for), or getting name-checked in regional sources.  Strong fail of WP:GNG.  WP:COI and WP:PROMO issues here a no ordinary WP editor would write such an extensively referenced (with full citations) about such an inherently non-notable character; protects the article from being WP:A7.  If I felt this BLP has a chance of being a Keep, I would edit out these refs clarify further the non-notability. Britishfinance (talk) 14:53, 7 March 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.