Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tavonia Evans


 * 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 keep. Some off-point accusations aside, the Keep comments brought forward evidence of significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources, which most of the Delete comments did not engage. The one Delete commenter who did engage with the source discussion ended by withdrawing their position. RL0919 (talk) 04:21, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Tavonia Evans

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Non-notable crypto expert. Sources from reliable publications are just name drops without any significant coverage. Fails the GNG. ~Styyx Talk ? 21:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC) *Delete more crypto fluff. Is there anyone connected with crypto that isn't an expert? Agree with the name drops, sourcing is no where near GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 22:10, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Cryptocurrency,  and United States of America.  ~Styyx Talk ? 21:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Sounds like you have a bias against Black Women. 2601:152:30D:2DBE:7D7A:6084:8770:8388 (talk) 18:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Wanna have a laugh with me mate? ~Styyx Talk ? 19:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * OH, I'm not even going near that one. Colour of her skin isn't the issue, quality of the sources is. One world brother. One love. Oaktree b (talk) 19:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Right CNN, Glamour, etc are not quality sources. 2601:152:30D:2DBE:4098:57AE:93B8:7C11 (talk) 21:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Again, they don't mention her at length. Can we stop with the racism please? Oaktree b (talk) 00:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC)


 * She actually developed and launched a crypto that still active - that is not just name dropping. How many women do you know have developed and launched a blockchain? https://github.com/guapcrypto - https://www.guapcoin.org 2601:152:30D:2DBE:7D7A:6084:8770:8388 (talk) 18:30, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No idea to be honest, crypto isn't in my wheelhouse. Railways and baseball. Oaktree b (talk) 19:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * well then do you know enough to determine who is notable in crypto??? 2601:152:30D:2DBE:4098:57AE:93B8:7C11 (talk) 21:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * no one is notable in crypto, we're discussing reliable sources that mention her at length. We need sources that are unrelated to her, discussing her as a person, not as some "expert" on a subject. Oaktree b (talk) 00:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)


 * " Non-notable Expert? " Expert Instructor here: https://classrebel.com/ & https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/business/tech/cryptocurrency-questions-answers/?utm_term=link&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twCNN&utm_content=2021-10-07T15%3A00%3A18#/ - CNN literally lists her as one of 15 "Experts ". Video evidence provided. 2601:152:30D:2DBE:7D7A:6084:8770:8388 (talk) 18:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Those aren't RS. The CNN link barely mentions her. We need articles about her, not just using her name. Oaktree b (talk) 19:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ozy Article - and Glamour article added. 2601:152:30D:2DBE:4098:57AE:93B8:7C11 (talk) 21:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * https://www.ozy.com/the-new-and-the-next/can-her-black-powered-crypto-make-gurus-of-the-next-generation/93489/ 2601:152:30D:2DBE:4098:57AE:93B8:7C11 (talk) 21:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * There are many sources that are specifically name her as an expert - not just name drop 2601:152:30D:2DBE:7D7A:6084:8770:8388 (talk) 18:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, but they aren't substantial coverage of her. Most are just name drops, that's the issue. We need articles about her. Not using her as a talking head on xyz subject. Oaktree b (talk) 19:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The CNN article has 3 videos of her sharing her expertise. 2601:152:30D:2DBE:4098:57AE:93B8:7C11 (talk) 21:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * again, she's a talking head, they articles aren't about her as a person. We need sources that discuss her at length, not simply mention her in passing. Show me some that do that and we can revisit. Oaktree b (talk) 00:14, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete crypto flff that fails GNG dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 18:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I see at minimum 3 sources that are significantly about her: OZY, Glamour (she's one of many but there are 6 paragraphs on her), and Face2FaceAfrica. There are also a couple of interviews, evidence of speaking engagements, and shorter mentions in other publications. Lamona (talk) 01:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Glamour maybe, Ozy looks like a blog. Face2Face africa, ungh not really. A few paragraphs in a fahsion magazine is a start I guess. Long way from GNG. Oaktree b (talk) 22:56, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ozy_(media_company) is not a blog, and although it also isn't the New York Times it seems legit. It appears to be a small but not disparaged media company. Ditto Face2Face_Africa. Both of those references are to full-sized articles. As periodicals, they both have staffs that function as journalists, but I couldn't find an actual editorial statement online for either. BTW, the relationship of both of these companies to their newspapers/journals is similar to the relationship the Conde Nast has with so  many magazines in terms of the business end. Although the Glamour piece has her as one of many, it doesn't distract from the whole. And Glamour has done some good quality journalistic work. The name is unfortunate (dating from 1939, a very different time), but it covers a wide range of women's issues.  Lamona (talk) 02:14, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * They lost with with the accusation of racism. If we resort to that level in an AfD discussion, I can't take anything they say seriously. What I choose to disclose of my personal life is my business, what you choose to decide for me is an issue. Had I already not previously disclosed it, I would ask them how do they know I'm not black. If this was an actual vote, I'd keep it "delete" simply to prove a point. We're here to discuss the quality of sources. I have no further interest in discussing this. The sources below actually do help prove GNG, for what it's worth. !neutral at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 20:00, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Adweek - https://www.adweek.com/media/crypto-guapcoin-amplifies-voices-of-the-black-community/ - Adweek ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adweek ). 2601:CA:8280:82C0:F941:438:E6B0:AA8 (talk) 09:09, 2 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom. no significant coverage. NMasiha (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV per the cogent source analysis by Lamona. The three sources all have editorial oversight and adress the subject directly and in detail. I'm not seeing a good argument as to why these sources should not be counted as significant independent RS evidence towards meeting GNG. Also the fact that CNN included her on a panel of crypto currency experts I think bolsters the significance/credibility of the coverage in the less well known media articles.4meter4 (talk) 01:28, 4 October 2022 (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.