Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Savannah Seymour


 * 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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies.  So Why  08:35, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Savannah Seymour

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a person whose only potential claim of notability, launching an online magazine five months ago, is not reliably sourced. Of the six footnotes here, three are unnecessary duplications of one of the other three, so there are really only three sources -- one of which is a Twitter tweet, one briefly quotes her as just one of 18 soundbite-providers in an article about something other than her, and she's the bylined author of the only reference that actually has any substance to it. But as always, a person gets a Wikipedia article by being substantively (as opposed to soundbitey) the subject (as opposed to the author) of content in reliable sources (as opposed to social media) -- which means that none of the sources here are cutting it at all, and nothing claimed in the article entitles her to an automatic inclusion freebie in the absence of better sourcing than this. Bearcat (talk) 20:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:58, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:44, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:44, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —  Za  wl  18:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. this is essentially an advertisement for her magazine.  DGG ( talk ) 21:09, 22 August 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.