Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quinn Archer


 * 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. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:41, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Quinn Archer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Basically the only justification for the article to exist (as explained on the talk page) is that the subject has been featured in the Vanity Fair. Otherwise, I do not see any notability whatsoever, and I was not able to find sources demonstrating notability. I do not believe that every person ever featured in the Vanity Fair is notable. Ymblanter (talk) 20:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - as i wrote there it's a self promotion and/or a Major record label promotion - the pages in vanity fair are named "vanity fair promotion" - she's done nothing at all so far - Blump007 (talk) 09:06, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - looks like this has been written to promote her debut single, released on 3 December. Looks like a clear case of WP:TOOSOON. For all we know she might be all over the headlines next week but I can't see any significant coverage at all at the moment. Sionk (talk) 19:11, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Promotional article, with no evidence of notability. I think a speedy deletion would not be out of the question, but three previous incarnations of it have already been speedily deleted, and a clear AfD "delete" decision will make it easier to stop any further re-creations. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: For anyone who is interested, here is a brief history of the four incarnations of this article. The original version of this article, written by an editor with the username Quinn Archer, was a blatantly promotional page with no serious claim of significance. The article was deleted under speedy deletion criteria A7 and G11. User Quinn Archer then proceeded to create further copies of the same self-promotional page at User:Quinn Archer and Quinn archer. Both were speedily deleted as promotional, but not before Quinn archer had been taken to Articles for deletion/Quinn archer, where three editors were unaninmous for "delete". User Quinn Archer was also advised against posting an autobiographical article. The next day, a brand new single purpose account was created, and recreated the same article, back at its original title Quinn Archer. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Which is a good argument in favor of salting all these names.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. and Salt. per . I  was tempted to  speedy this article and salt  it, but  in  deference to  James' suggestion, I'll wait  for the outcome of this AfD. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:19, 1 December 2013 (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.