Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Model View Culture

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:08, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Model View Culture

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

Prod removed several months ago by claims of notabiliy. However, still fails WP:GNG; does not have in-depth coverage in WP:RS. While it has passing mentions in articles, all the in-depth coverage is of the blog's creator Shanley Kane and her abusive tirades, her relaionship with weev, and the drama with the other person leaving. Article creator is currently banned for abusive/disruptive behavior that is frankly similar to what Kane has been reported to do. —Мандичка^YO 😜 23:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - more of a promotion piece than information. Heyyouoverthere (talk) 01:09, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - There do seem to be a good number of mediocre sources about it, and it's mentioned in lots of major publications (a brief mention doesn't help satisfy GNG but is worth considering when talking about the notability of a publication in particular since being cited is in large part what makes it notable). Still, it's probably not quite enough. It does, however, look like Kane may be notable and this would be worth a section in an article about her? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability. cagliost (talk) 10:48, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacks coverage to demonstate notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:20, 21 June 2015 (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.