Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carola Remer

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 no consensus. T. Canens (talk) 01:41, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Carola Remer (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)

All she has is modeling agencies and directories. Trillfendi (talk) 14:41, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:10, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:10, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:10, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:11, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:12, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Nomination rationale is false, as article already has a Cut (NY Mag) source listed. I just added an easily located Die Welt profile. In other words, this article is sourced to the same level as the dozens of other 3-sentence name+heritage+agency+clickbait fashion model articles proliferating throughout the encyclopedia. Technically, a pass of WP:GNG, and perhaps of WP:ENT (since WP:NMODEL just redirects there), depending on how one interprets fashion model participation in shows, ads, and covers as "other productions" or not. Bakazaka (talk) 22:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Cut’s Meet the New Girl series was just an appendage of their Model Manual (aka the directory of profiles they haven’t updated since 2012). They really only tend to offer trivia beyond saying a few jobs a model did. Trillfendi (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not a modeling agency, not a directory. Bakazaka (talk) 23:13, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That “article” is 3 sentences then right at the bottom Explore other rising stars (plus all the big names) in our extensive Model Manual, featuring runway pics, glamorous editorials, model bios, career timelines, and more. Very obvious that they wanted the reader to segue to their directory since that’s what they were known for. Meanwhile in her career section, the first sentence is a dead link to her

former modeling agency One Management, which shouldn’t have been there in the first place. The only thing left was models.com which is reserved for the infobox. The nonsensical inclusion of “supermodels.nl” which is a forum at best, is undignified. Trillfendi (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There is nothing indicating that Ms. Remer's career as a model is particularly notable. As mentioned above, any references link to model directories, or aren't working links (supermodels.nl and the NY Magazine links, as of right now). Balon Greyjoy (talk) 07:22, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Balon Greyjoy: Is it your understanding that the working Die Welt link in the article is a model directory? Bakazaka (talk) 16:30, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep appears to barely satisfy WP:GNG and WP:ENT. I also agree that the nomination rationale is false. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 17:21, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How wonderful it would be that people would actually learn about fashion media before the uneducated quips about my rationale. Too much like right I guess. Take out the defunct NYMag directory and it’s defunct Meet the New Girl blurb attached to it, take out the obsolete, inappropriate reference to her former employer One Management, and take out the ridiculous, unreliable defunct forum “supermodels.nl” and you’re now left with one thing. And that’s enough to satisfy an article? No. Trillfendi (talk) 17:51, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep subject meets WP:GNG and WP:ENT Lubbad85 (☎) 15:20, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - does not meet WP:NMODEL, has not "made unique, prolific or innovative contributions" - just having a job as a model does not establish notability - Epinoia (talk) 04:14, 10 May 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.