- 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. Daniel (talk) 01:45, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Olga Litvinenko (businesswoman)[edit]
- Olga Litvinenko (businesswoman) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non notable individual. Does not meet WikiProject Beauty Pageants notability guidelines nor is she notable as a businessperson. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 11:53, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Make that five new articles. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 16:23, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - with the current citations provided, it's a keep for me, These are good apnews.com, greenwichtime.com, stamfordadvocate.com. Chelokabob (talk) 09:10, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Miss Connecticut USA. The AP article appears to have been a Greenwichtime article, so it likely never circulated outside the state. Reference 1 is likely paid press of some sort given the final sentence starts off with "Visit lolaleone.com to order". Pretty much all significant coverage is surrounding the Miss Connecticut USA pageant. Best, GPL93 (talk) 22:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Notable enough for keeping as a bio in its own right.--Ipigott (talk) 10:20, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:26, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The coverage is pretty much all local, or all very limited in the context of the pageant. We have decided that non-winners in US pageants are not notable for competition, and the coverage beyond that is of the hyper local kind that does not amount to passing GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete very local coverage only, per JPL DGG ( talk ) 07:18, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 14:12, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - All the coverage I found is primarily localized to where she lives. I do not see enough to have the subject qualify for WP:GNG on my end. Missvain (talk) 04:30, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Article is based on WP:CHURN MaskedSinger (talk) 09:06, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete lack of SIGCOV in independent, third-party reliable sources to pass BASIC. ——Serial 16:05, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creepTalk 21:18, 27 December 2021 (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.