Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrea Rodriguez

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. slakr^\ talk / 10:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea Rodriguez

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm nominating this after checking out a COI editor's contributions after I blocked them for a COI username. The original version of the article was fairly promotional in tone, but there is enough of an assertion of notability to where I decided to clean it up. You can see the original version of the article here. (So full disclosure with all that.) Even after cleaning the article I had a lot of trouble finding sources for everything. The article asserted that she was in various episodes and so on, but I don't see where she's listed in IMDb for any roles- she doesn't seem to have a profile at all. The roles all appear to be minor, trivial bit parts from what I can see. As far as her modeling goes, I couldn't find any sourcing to really show that her gigs have attracted any true notice at all. It's expected that models will model for various places, but notability is WP:NOTINHERITED by Rodriguez having modeled for various notable places. Her biggest assertion of notability is for her beauty pageant titles, but I can't see where any of them are particularly noteworthy either. She holds the title for Ms. Alaska United States, which I want to stress is not the same thing as Miss Alaska USA (as Ms. United States is/was an alternate title for Miss United States). I can't really find anything out there about this pageant that doesn't come back to various WP:PRIMARY sources about Rodriguez. The other pageant titles appear to follow along the same guidelines. A search for "Andreina Rodri" (as one of the Spanish language news sources has her under that name) doesn't bring up much of anything either. I can't see where she particularly warrants an article on Wikipedia at this point in time. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:27, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I have to concur with the nominator here - having seen how thorough and methodical she is in the past with source searches, I don't believe there's evidence of notability out there to be found. Yes, this is a 'per nom' vote but well, look at the nomination. It's all there. Mabalu (talk) 12:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This looked like an article against which the somewhat dirty tactic of gutting before dragging to AfD had been practiced. While this is true to some extent, even after looking at the original version I'm still not seeing anything rising to the level of a Special Notability pass as an actor, nor do I feel GNG is satisfied here. Carrite (talk) 15:41, 8 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't meant as an underhanded tactic- initially I did it because I'd been somewhat certain that there would be sources out there for some of the claims and that she'd pass notability guidelines, so I was pretty surprised that she had as little coverage as she did. I did link to the original format in my post above though, so people could compare the two. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:38, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Despite Tokyogirl's diligent attempt to clean up the article and salvage it, I can't find anything to suggest that it can be reworked. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 08:36, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.