Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomica Wright


 * 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. Courcelles 01:15, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Tomica Wright

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The two sources in the article are imdb and musicianguide.com, which are not reliable sources. Wright is most known for being Eazy-E's widow and owner of a record label. As there is not any significant coverage, this businesswoman is non-notable. Karppinen (talk) 18:10, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:03, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep True, that her main notability comes from being the wife/widow of rap star musician, Eazy E, as well as her inheritance and running the record label Ruthless Records, but she is also a film producer. Agreed that any one of these alone might not rise to the level of notability needed for inclusion on Wikipedia, but the three combined add up to the totality of circumstances that do make her notable enough for an article on Wikipedia. Sf46 (talk)
 * Comment The three combined still do not make her notable. Wright's production work has been relatively minor and films mentioned on her IMDb page are too unknown to establish any kind of notability. And as I said before, if we are somehow going to keep this article, it should at least have some reliable sources. Karppinen (talk) 07:51, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  00:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete BLP without any reliable sources. Only a few passing mentions found at Google News . --MelanieN (talk) 13:00, 17 September 2010 (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.