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.

Ashley C. Ford[edit]

The result was Snowball keep. Gamaliel (talk) 23:11, 28 April 2019 (UTC) [reply]

Ashley C. Ford (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I'm not sure if this really meets WP:NOTABILITY. Thoughts? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:24, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:59, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:59, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:59, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:00, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:00, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:00, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Insufficient evidence of notability. --Tataral (talk) 20:46, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I would like to see some more citations from local news sources. If she is notable and from NYC there should be a number of local articles in NY Post, NY Times, NY Daily News, NY Magazine etc.. if she is on the 30 under 30 in media on Forbes. If those citations can be established then possibly the article can be justified but if not then a delete.ScienceAdvisor (talk) 01:13, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep She seems to have some noteworthy coverage, but article needs to be expanded I feel.★Trekker (talk) 01:35, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Many sufficient sources exist to prove notability and expand the article further. I encourage a google search. Apparently this woman is relevant in every demographic from Glamour to The Guardian. Trillfendi (talk) 16:19, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Trillfendi: I don't understand "relevant in every demographic". Can you reword this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:48, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the article isn’t great but notability seems to be established well beyond question. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the article isn’t great but notability seems to be established well beyond question. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the article isn’t great but notability seems to be established well beyond question. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Ashley C. Ford is a notable queer podcaster who has a long career ahead of her. To the main folx who worked on this article so far (looks like Sweet Kate (talk) and Koavf (talk) ) I would suggest adding content about the shows that she has worked on and what she has done on them, as well as her connections to other notable folx, movements, etc.. I will make folx on @wikilgbt and @WikiWomeninRed aware of this article so that they can help. RachelWex (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @RachelWex: The article doesn't even mention podcasting--where are you getting this information? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:41, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article does mention podcasting: Ford is the host of Brooklyn-based television program and podcast 112BK. The sources from the New York Times and PBS Newshour also discuss her podcasting work. XOR'easter (talk) 21:47, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's stupid: I just misstyped the search in my browser. Either way, simply having a podcast doesn't make you notable but would have to be established with sources, of course. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Sourcing is more than adequate to establish notability. XOR'easter (talk) 21:06, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree there are sufficient sources to establish notability. Megs (talk) 21:46, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:ANYBIO as seen in the comments by XOR'easter and Trillfendi. Recent improvements to the article further demonstrate notability. Thsmi002 (talk) 21:58, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:BASIC. There are several reliable independent sources that establish her notability. --Nonmodernist (talk) 22:18, 28 April 2019 (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.