Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cynthia Leigh
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Neil ╦ 11:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Cynthia Leigh
Non-notable fandom personality DasGreggo 09:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)DasGreggo — DasGreggo (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Keep - Notable in the cosplay world which is very big in Japan and Brazil. Outside of two article talk pages and their own talk page the nom has never made edits outside this topic.[1] --Oakshade 16:25, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - Who cares about her outside of the cosplay world? I have a good friend who I care about as well. He is notable to me, my other friends, and the people who go to our school. Does that mean I should write an article about him on Wikipedia? --Potato dude42 01:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete: fails WP:BIO. One would think if she was genuinely notable in the cosplay world, she'd have more than 89 Google hits ("Cynthia Leigh" + "cosplay") [2], where such searches overwhelmingly favor subjects with technological fanbases. She was thoughtful enough to give her deviantART profile, which only has 4,000 pageviews; an astonishingly low total for a three year old DA account, where popular cosplayers with active works routinely reach a hundred thousand page views or more. There are likewise only 96 Google hits for her "clothing line" [3]. I'm sure that there are a couple cosplay boards and conventions where this gal is a Big Name Fan, but that doesn't translate into notability. RGTraynor 18:34, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
- Delete WP:BIO--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 19:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 16:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. The article fails to state what makes her particularly notable as a cosplayer - indeed, the stated fact that she is apparently only 'semi-professional', and has various other jobs as well, suggests that she isn't. The references aren't particularly useful here - they include her own blog. In the absence of any obvious notability, this should be deleted. Terraxos 00:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 03:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep and add cleanup tags. I'd also like to request a checkuser on the nom as it's edit history, or lack thereof, is rather odd. Jtrainor 10:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment: Just out of curiosity, how do you feel that's pertinent to the nomination? RGTraynor 12:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Possible sock-puppet, particuarly relavent during AfD debates.--Oakshade 15:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, basically. I could be wrong, but better safe than sorry. If it is a sock puppet, not like the page can't be renomed by someone else, after all. Jtrainor 17:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sockpuppets aren't illegal, per se; it's the use of them in impermissible ways which is the problem. This isn't obviously a bad-faith nomination, and it isn't as if there's a string of SPAs involved in the discussion. RGTraynor 17:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Even just one possible SPA should be noted. There doesn't have to be "a string of SPAs" for editors to take note.--Oakshade 18:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- For the record, not a sockpuppet. I'm a "big name fan" much like this person, and I've asked the people of the convention where I'm a "big name fan" at *not* to make a Wikipedia entry for me, because I'm not notable. Neither is this person. DasGreggo 06:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)DasGreggo
- Even just one possible SPA should be noted. There doesn't have to be "a string of SPAs" for editors to take note.--Oakshade 18:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sockpuppets aren't illegal, per se; it's the use of them in impermissible ways which is the problem. This isn't obviously a bad-faith nomination, and it isn't as if there's a string of SPAs involved in the discussion. RGTraynor 17:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Non-notable and fails WP:BIO. --Potato dude42 01:01, 10 July 2007 (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.
