Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sophia Peer


 * 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. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗ plicit  03:27, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Sophia Peer

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:BLP of a filmmaker, not reliably sourced as passing WP:CREATIVE. The notability claim on offer here is that her work exists, and the referencing is almost entirely to primary sources (her own self-published website about herself, her "staff" profiles on the self-published websites of organizations she's directly affiliated with, etc.) that are not support for notability at all -- out of 11 footnotes, the only one that goes to a real piece of third party coverage in a real WP:GNG-worthy media outlet is paywalled, so it's impossible for me to determine how much it actually says about her for the purposes of helping to contribute GNG points (all I can determine is that her name doesn't appear before the "pay to read" lock at all.) But regardless of whether it says very much about her or not, it still takes a lot more than just one GNG-worthy source to pass GNG. Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to be referenced considerably better than this. Bearcat (talk) 17:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 17:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:41, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:51, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * - Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing.
 * Logs:
 * --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 3 November 2021 (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.