Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tatiana Shamratova


 * 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. Deor (talk) 12:36, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Tatiana Shamratova

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BLP with no independent reliable sources. Prodded before and the main author has tried to provide sources but to no avail. There is no doubt that the subject gets photographed a lot, but there is no evidence of any general notability having been met by an absence of in-depth reporting in reliable sources. As it stands, the article could be seen seen as violating WP:NOTADVERTISING.  Schwede 66  17:12, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  17:28, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Obviously Shamratova is a working fashion model but she does not get much media exposure other than her face and body in videos and advertisements such as here and I think the general view here at Wikipedia is that photos by themselves are not sufficient to indicate notability. Not much indication of interest by looking at pageviews averaging about 5/day (not considering spikes due to initial submission and deletion issues) although of course this is not an official test of notability. The WP:GNG requires multiple independent nontrivial reliable sources for a subject to merit an article. With the current "article" of several large paragraphs without any sources, it is entirely WP:OR since reliable secondary sources are not discussing the subject impartially.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   17:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 02:40, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. While she's been in ads, this is an unsourced and unsourceable BLP.  Models are not automatically notable due to what they work they do. To be blunt, they are a dime a dozen. Bearian (talk) 14:37, 9 September 2014 (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.