Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chelsea Vowel

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. czar ⨹ 23:30, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea Vowel

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

WP:BLP of a writer, relying entirely on self-written primary "sources" which cannot confer notability. No prejudice against recreation in the future if proper reliable sources can be added, but a person does not qualify for a Wikipedia article on the basis of their own social networking presence if independent coverage isn't there to support it. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 02:38, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 03:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 03:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – A search for an in-depth profile didn't find anything. Unless we quote her blog and articles directly I don't think we can add much to her short Huffington Post biographical note. – Margin1522 (talk) 06:47, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:45, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Need reliable sources to demonstrate notability. Hlevy2 (talk) 12:11, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per the nominator. The Huff Post thing alone is insufficient to sway things. - Sitush (talk) 12:48, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Sources are terrible, unlikely to be notable. Grognard Chess (talk) Ping when replying 04:26, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not enough coverage in third party sources. Fails our notability threshold. Jim Carter 09:49, 26 December 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.