Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veronica Monet


 * 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. Sources found to show basic notability. RL0919 (talk) 23:47, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Veronica Monet

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV. Promotional as first reference is link to book on Amazon and this passed Afc.  scope_creep Talk  22:35, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:40, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:40, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:40, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:40, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:42, 9 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - Subject is not notable and page is promotional. Meatsgains (talk) 01:25, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:BASIC. Sourcing is available: . PROMO can be dealt with through editing.Thsmi002 (talk) 03:20, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as per Thsmi002's rationale. John B123 (talk) 09:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep for meeting BASIC per the above sources (1, 2, 3 - 4th doesn't really meet SIGCOV). There is some content that should either be sourced or deleted. It is not so promotional that it warrants deletion. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:43, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment That's cool. If somebody can update the article with some additional references I'll withdraw the nomination.  scope_creep Talk  19:00, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I've added in three of the sources. However,, Meatsgains has !voted delete, so unless they change it can't be withdrawn (though obviously you can change your !vote) Nosebagbear (talk) 19:30, 11 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep I've added 2 more book citations. Would you consider reversing your vote ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caelanmac (talk • contribs)


 * 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.