Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emil Rengle

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. Davewild (talk) 18:28, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Emil Rengle

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

In terms of "sources", we have three links to Wikipedia and four to YouTube, which I think can be summarily dismissed. We then have a dead link and two functional links to the subject's official sites/business ventures, which again are dismissible. Finally, two other things:

A tabloid article; I think the headline speaks for itself: "Shocking scenes involving Antonia at the mall! The whole time, she held hands with a cute lad and let him fondle her behind!"

A blurb in the local Forbes; even if it sounds vaguely impressive, we should note that a) the same issue featured nonentity (encyclopedically speaking) after nonentity after nonentity after nonentity after nonentity after nonentity after nonentity under the very same headline ("portrait of a trendsetter") - in other words, being part of this feature in no way suggests notability; and b) in any event, even if it did, WP:BIO requires "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources", which we don't have. - Biruitorul ^Talk 13:56, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note As an administrator, I declined the A7 because it made some assertion of notability.

Delete lack of WP:RS. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 22:33, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:11, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If nothing else WP:TOOSOON for this performer. It's hard to judge the reliability of the publications here, but there are only a few that would remain after deleting the youtube and WP sources, and also the sources that do not mention the subject of the article (i.e. #13 "WorldRedEye"). Also, I seriously suspect that the article was created as a promotion; it has much promotional language; the professional-looking photo portrait was uploaded by the article's SPA and is listed as "own work;" said SPA deleted the first Speedy Delete tag from the article. This might have been a simple mis-understanding of WP procedure, but it doesn't bode well. LaMona (talk) 21:06, 28 May 2015 (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.