Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paige Niemann (2nd nomination)


 * 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 no consensus again‎ __EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Although relisted, there wasn't a clear consensus. If the article still isnt improved then this could be nominated again. (non-admin closure) Jeffhardyfan08 (talk) 00:09, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Paige Niemann
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This was just closed as no consensus, without any improvement to the article. She had her 15 minutes. A clear case of WP:BIO1E, no in-depth coverage other than fluff pieces. Outside of her look-alike status, she has no claim to fame. Might be worth a mention somewhere on the Arianna Grande page, if there was a section on "look-alikes".  Onel 5969  TT me 22:12, 14 April 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:41, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Entertainment, Internet,  and California.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep: I'm afraid I don't agree with the logic that underlies "I don't think the things she does can confer notability, even if they're repeatedly covered by reliable sources". It's not a 1e question, because the 'e' stands for 'event', not 'employment'. Getting coverage in the press at multiple different points in time, for the same role, is not a 1e problem. In other words, getting lots of coverage for the same event is a problem; getting lots of coverage for the same role, when multiple events happen in the context of that role, is not. I'm afraid you'll need to point out which of the many RSes cited are "fluff pieces", as I can't pinpoint them myself. Also, no new information has been brought to light since the last AfD, so I'm not sure what the cause for a new one is. Pinging all participants of the previous: . theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 23:06, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment I voted merge to the Ariana Grande article last time, she's basically using someone else's fame to be famous.
 * Not sure what else you want me to look at? Oaktree b (talk) 23:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Still passes GNG. And a career is not "one event", so it passes BLP1E. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually, I looked again, this is clear BLP1E. Delete. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Keep Borderline notable. Alternatively mention on Ariana Grande article and provide redirect. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is copied from the previous nomination: WP:BLP1E only applies iff all of the three criteria are met: (1) If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event – not met. RSes have covered her initially going viral on TikTok in 2019 (,, , etc) as well as the controversy about her OnlyFans account ; (2) If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual – not met. Niemann isn't a low-profile individual; she's (voluntarily) given an interview to a notable, reliable publication (Entertainment Tonight) and participates in self-promotion through her TikTok; (3) If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented – not really sure what the "event" would be here, but I guess probably going viral on TikTok as a Grande-lookalike? If that's the case, then this one definitely isn't met, as a lot sources covered her virality on TikTok (with her as the subject obviously). TL;DR, none of the criteria listed at BLP1E are met. End of copied text. Yes, if she were not a lookalike, she would not be notable, but that's not an event. That's her role in these events. Pamzeis (talk) 07:19, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. She is obviously not a low profile individual and therefore WP:BLP1E criterion is not met. Please read, it has a specific set of criteria. CT55555 (talk) 22:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - coverage is not sufficient for WP:BASIC, WP:CREATIVE or WP:NACTOR notability and the article should be excluded per WP:N as WP:PROMO. There is a small flurry of coverage between Nov 26 2019 and Dec 8 2019 that consists of E!News reporting Niemann is a lookalike on Tiktok with 2 million followers, and 145,000 on Instagram, Grande mentioned her on Twitter, quotes from Niemann about Grande's tweet; Teen Vogue reporting what Niemann says about her TikTok impersonation; CBC Kids including her at the top of a list of celebrity lookalikes with 4 sentences, repeating the same information about the follower count and Grande's tweet; NME reporting Grande's tweet and what Neimann said to E!News; Teen Vogue reporting Neimann's interview with Entertainment Tonight, and her previous interview with Teen Vogue. And there are two 2022 sources about criticism of her impersonation previously, including from Grande and Grande fans, and also more recently from Grande fans about her OnlyFans work. Buzzfeed also covers criticism from Grande in 2020. The available coverage lacks the quality, depth, and independence needed to create more than a WP:BROCHURE article. Beccaynr (talk) 04:07, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep: I have to agree with the rationale of Pamzeis in this and the prior AFD.  Gaining fame from being an impressionist based on a single impression can happen.--Milowent • hasspoken  13:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.