Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kat Hessen

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. Sandstein 07:39, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kat Hessen

[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)

Lacks significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. —Chowbok ☠ 04:50, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:11, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:12, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:12, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails WP:GNG. She was listed as up-and-coming back in 2011 before ... (~~unsourced and a BLP issue that I'm removing now~~). Never mind, I found reference to it in the Vogue article and re-added the information. Orville1974 (talk)
Comment "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. So "all of a sudden" the sources such as Vogue didn’t do that? 🤔 Just interesting how you "serendipitously" came across this recently created page and decided to propose deletion based on another page I created ... Trillfendi (talk) 16:51, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It wasn't serendipitous. I was looking at your contributions.—Chowbok ☠ 09:11, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, that’s why serendipitously was in quotations, you brute. Preening through my pages I created just because you don’t like it. Trillfendi (talk) 13:33, 25 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.