Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruthie Collins


 * 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 and permit recreation. Is promotional in tone and appears to be close paraphrasing so this is clearly not to our standards but the subject is clearly notable. Therefore removing this to make room for a new compliant article. Spartaz Humbug! 06:28, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Ruthie Collins

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable, fails WP:MUSIC. Reads like a promotional piece. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 11:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 11:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 11:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 11:24, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 11:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per nom: the only coverage I can find are reworded press releases. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 11:51, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree much of her coverage—especially those with CMT website—is lazy paraphrasing of press releases. But at least one performance review in a major metro daily (http://beta.latimes.com/entertainment/music/posts/la-et-ms-stagecoach-ruthie-collins-backstage-20160501-story.html) isn’t too shabby. So is being name checked at least on three separate occasions by Rolling Stone. Add those with a release on an established independent label, it’s enough to qualify per wikipedia criteria. ShelbyMarion (talk) 16:27, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep There's good coverage of her and her work as pointed out. Here's some more: CMT 2017, CMT 2016 and Huffington Post. Passes GNG. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 23:28, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment The article does read like a promotional piece and fails WP:MUSIC but it does conform to GNG. Hence, I propose cleanup for those sentences and parts written like an advert. Ernestchuajiasheng (talk) 03:18, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Covg is pretty shy of what is usually reqd for performers. Article is all OR and somewhat PROMO in nature. Agricola44 (talk) 23:26, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   10:41, 19 December 2017 (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.