Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbie's careers

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. Consensus that article is a legitimate content fork and possesses independent notability (non-admin closure) Nosebagbear (talk) 17:25, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Barbie's careers

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This lacks sufficient separate noteability from the main Barbie article. The page references just note that particular Barbies existed and do not otherwise show any form of noteability. Jtrainor (talk) 17:22, 2 July 2019 (UTC) Jtrainor (talk) 17:22, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Should it be merged with the main page? Does it need its own? I'm not sure what to think! MaskedSinger (talk) 18:26, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm not seeing a reason to delete in the nomination. The page is obviously a spinoff from the main article about the topic, like an appendix. As that main article is 67K, that seems fine. There seems to be plenty of academic interest in the topic. For example, this paper identifies computer engineer as the 126th career and this demonstrates the scale of the topic. Andrew D. (talk) 09:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep non trivial coverage..the subject passes GNG Lightburst (talk) 03:35, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:21, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - well known in pop culture. Bearian (talk) 16:11, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article is in dire need of expansion, but that is not a reason to delete because of WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. Found lots of sources: Time (magazine) [1], Vogue (magazine) [2], Insider Inc. [3], PopSugar [4], Working Mother [5] and more. Easily passes WP:LISTN since it's "list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources". Not to mention even many more sources that mention how impactful Barbie's careers are [6] [7] [8] Jovanmilic97 (talk) 16:11, 9 July 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.