Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Tanster


 * 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. Obvious sockpuppetry aside, the keep comments do not make any commonly accepted arguments for notability. RL0919 (talk) 05:17, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

The Tanster

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I have not been able to establish any notability for this person, and the included references do not do so either. This doesn't appear to meet the standards for Biographies of living persons, and clearly displays a lack of NPOV even in the first paragraph. Jelleecat (talk) 05:17, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:08, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:08, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:08, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete the sources are all local. If you do a search for "Tanster Rainbow Project" you will quickly come to someone's Linkedin page where they claim they did social media manipulation for the "Tanster Rainbow Project", which was apparently intended as a way to promote local charities. Inadequate independent and diverse sourcing to establish notability.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 08:10, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * KEEPBold text I created this Wiki account when I heard someone had made a recommendation to delete Tanster’s Wikipedia page. I am fan of Tanster’s and regularly follow her blog and YouTube page. She has a very active presence across multiple social media platforms. I have noticed that Wikipedia seems to have a preference for old media forms in determining whether a person is worthy of inclusion, but I would suggest this preference is not reflective of modern culture. Tanster has thousands of fans not only across America but also throughout the world. She is popular, respected and influential.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basilisk Bowbow (talk • contribs) 16:32, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note that the above account is an SPA with two edits in the Tanster-related fandom field.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)


 * KEEPBold textHello. Why would someone want to delete a page? I'm betting it's one of the crooks Tanster's exposing. The NXVIUM cult is associated with high profile politicians, such as Anthony Wiener, Huma Abedin, and a whole host of others. Tanster has broken the story about a witness to these high profile politicians. Do you think they want to avoid publicity like this? I'm sure they do. There is also the black magic con man sleazy sex guru pervert Mas Sajady who Tanster has exposed. She has loads of publicity about that on her Facebook and website. Mas Sajady has ties to pedophilia. You would think that anyone who would publicize that someone has ties to pedophilia -- would be a highly notable figure. Unless, perhaps, you are a pedophile yourself.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Secret Wahrheit (talk • contribs) 22:20, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * KEEPI would agree that this motion to delete Tanster's page is probably politically motivated. According to the Wikipedia definition of general notability, there is a presumption of notability if the person has received coverage in reliable, independent sources. The definition goes on to say that there are no fixed amount of sources required but "generally" multiple sources are expected. This means that one source can be sufficient. The definition also includes that any form of media is acceptable, not just "old" media as another commenter stated. Tanster has a very active following both of her art career and her activism. She is well known through out the Hamptons in New York but also has a large fan base across many countries. She is a social activist working in both women's rights and cult victimization. Her renown is growing. I think it would be a disservice to the community to deprive the public of the information that Wikipedia has about her. I also think it would a disservice to the good work she is doing. Thank you for your time.
 * Similar to ThatMontrealIP's comment above, both of the two previous comments are also from SPAs with edits only related to this Tanster fandom. I've commented on the Jamesbernet SPA before - the original creator of The Tanster article. I need to reiterate: Wikipedia is not about YOU. See also: Conflict of interest and What Wikipedia is not. Jelleecat (talk) 04:34, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, didn't realize it wasn't clear. I created the Tanster page. Full disclosure, I've been a fan of Tanster's for years. Who else is going to create a Wikipedia page but someone interested in a subject? Tanster has brought hundreds of new donors to the Coalition of Women's Cancers charity. She's raised tens of thousands of dollars. I have no financial interest in that charity or her work. I just admire and respect what she is doing. This was my first Wikipedia page. I am also thinking about making one for the Coalition of Women's Cancers. This wonderful charity has helped thousands of women with therapy and services over the years. I am also planning to make a page for them. Hopefully it won't get attacked the way Tanster's has. I'm really not sure why there is any resistance to her having a page. I will admit I have found the mechanics of Wikipedia difficult to navigate. Sorry if I'm not doing right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesbernet (talk • contribs) 23:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * My name was deleted from my original comment along with the date I made it. I think something Jelleecat did by adding a response may have deleted it. Anyway, it's from me and I'm not sure how to fix it. Sorry again. Jamesbernet —Preceding undated comment added 23:35, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That's all very interesting. How about explaining this edit where you make a detailed comment under your account, but intentionally sign it with "Secret Warheit"?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:24, 11 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Note to closing admin lots of duck-like fishiness in the malformatted keep votes above, an SPI was filed.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:21, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * KEEP So let me see if I've got this straight. Someone wants to take down the page of charity artist? Is that right? Why would anyone want to do that? You know Tanster donates her original and innovative artwork for women's cancer, right? She's active at many charity events. She participates in parades with her art cars promoting the charity. She's got tons of fans. She's inspired a lot of kids to get into art and charity. I mean seriously, why would anyone to take her page down? This is ridiculous. Thiscantbereal (talk) 17:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * another sudden SPA.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:11, 12 January 2019 (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.