Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patty Mayo


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  12:51, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Patty Mayo

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

Moved out of draft solely sourced to primary non-reliable sources. Not enough in-depth coverage from independent sources to pass WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 11:33, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Massachusetts. Shellwood (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete One could say that Patty Mayo doesn't cut the mustard when it comes to WP:GNG. RickinBaltimore (talk) 11:45, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * spread a bit too thin perhaps. Oaktree b (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Heavily promotional piece sourced entirely from the subject's own YouTube channel.   Ravenswing     12:20, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete No coverage found in RS, Dexerto and the like. Delete for lack of sourcing and the appearance of PROMO. Oaktree b (talk) 14:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Onel5969, verily, your judgement rings true. It grieves the spirit, this erasure, compelled by our own policies. Yet, one ponders if, perchance, these same policies imperil the broader mission, consigning obscurity to the notable yet unheralded. A conundrum, indeed! Jack4576 (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Internet.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Entire article written with sources from his channel. No coverage other than a couple of articles and a police statement that talk about his staged videos. Dawnbails (talk) 14:19, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete poorly sourced. Fails WP:BIO for lack of independent coverage. LibStar (talk) 07:21, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:TNT and WP:BLP. This is a disaster of BLP violations wrapped in poorly worded nonsense. 15:47, 22 May 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearian (talk • contribs)
 * Delete. Does not appear to have reliable sourcing. The best I found were , but those aren't suitable for N or BLP. SWinxy (talk) 17:59, 22 May 2023 (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.