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 Keep. Michig (talk) 07:41, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fiona Bloom (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)

Despite having a large number of references, I have found none that are actually acceptable/verify notability. CorporateM (Talk) 03:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete When we have an article containing a promotional line like "With the success of these artists under her wing, her boss gave her the nod to start her own subsidiary record label, called 3-2-1", extreme skepticism is justified. Nominator is correct. The many references in the article do not meet our standards for reliable sources. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:05, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Sufficient sources have now been identified, and I thank those who have done so. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:53, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comments: I have not analyzed this enough to ascertain notability, but I'd like to mention that this recent deletion seems to contain some assertions of notability, and I'd like to see it reinstated/reverted in order to more fully analyze the article subject. Also, I'm not personally convinced of the photograph's copyright release (or rather lack thereof). It says "It was sent to me personally by the subject", but even though it has an OTRS ticket, there's no public indication who took the photo or whether they released it, which is a bit absurd because it is under a license that requires attribution. OK, I guess "Dion Kruczek" took the photo; striking my comment under the presumption that Dion Kruczek submitted a release of the photo. Softlavender (talk)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The reasons for the !deletes are the promotional tone and lack of good refs. Well, when we encounter such an article, shouldn't we just remove the promo content and find more refs. If no refs can be found, then AfD, right? A cursory search finds some [1][2][3][4][5] and maybe there are more. My search engine options are limited because google is blocked here. Might there be good refs out there? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:57, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment One of those is overtly a press release, and the others appear to me to be based largely on press releases. I am reluctant to accept interviews as evidence of notability. I wish there was something more solid. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:08, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I moved this to the mainspace on behalf of another (an IRC user, I think). It was quite a while ago, but it must have passed GNG in my eyes at that time. In fact, a couple of the refs I show above, used to be in the article, but were subsequently removed. Maybe they were not so good. Anyway, I am not biased, and will let the chips fall as they may. I do not defend articles because I started them. I have !voted deleted on a few of my own, and have even nommed a few of my own. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:00, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Subject is a notable music industry businesswoman and publicity agent associated with the labels Sub Verse Music, Zero Hour, TVT Records, and The Bloom Effect. She's worked in the music industry for almost two decades and now focuses on social media. BBC America profiled her last year[6] and the trade magazines mention her in spades. Her accomplishments are listed on her website.[7] In October 2006, she was featured in the print edition of Rolling Out magazine. In 2007, the National Association of Record Industry Professionals awarded her the "Best of the Biz" in the category of "Top Consultant / Strategist".[8]. In 2009, her biography was profiled by writer Thembisa Mshaka in the book Put Your Dreams First.[9] Viriditas (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Not at the Russell Simmons level (she only started ~20 years ago), but clearly a recognized leader in the industry since by at least the mid-2000s. Among other things, articles/coverage on her in BBC America, Soul Train, Soul Train, Soul Tracks, Rolling Out, Book(s): [10], [11]; at least four mentions as an industry leader in Billboard since 2006, plus listed as one of Billboard's list of Twitter accounts to follow; extensive mention of her in the trades since 1995; winner of NARIP award; Judge of the Independent Music Awards [12]; etc. Wiki article needs help but subject clearly meets notability requirements. Softlavender (talk) 06:27, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as above and more sources here.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 20:59, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep . The cited sources are IMO a bit thin on being reliable. For BLPs I generally look for articles in the established press (i.e. print media), and interview based content is a big no no. However, the claims to notability are genuine, the article is not A7 prone, and the BBC source inspires confidence, so I'll give this subject the benefit of the doubt. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:13, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I've expanded the article a bit with some more sources, including the BBC one. There is an element of puffery, but I get the impression sources approached her rather than vice versa and she has done things significant enough to warrant an article. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:18, 10 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.