Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victoria Yin

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 18:24, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria Yin

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

The sourcing is not bad, and maybe notability requirements are met. But I'm nominating this to get a second opinion from other Wikipedians about a BLP article about a minor that was evidently created by a single-purpose editor who very likely has a conflict of interest in creating this article. I would worry less about this if the article subject were already an adult. WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 18:43, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:21, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete This sister may be the more notable one of the two, but as I said on the other sister's AFD: "The reference style here hides the source of the references, and most are not RS." There are a lot of blogs and youtube films, some promotional sites, a few announcements of exhibits in not well-known places. What I don't find is anything from the art world - that is, no major museums or galleries. These two sisters are highly promoted, but may be just a flash in the pan. LaMona (talk) 23:34, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I should add to this that the articles appear to have been authored heavily by the same SPA User:Beginspring, something that I suspect makes them part of the very intense promotional campaign around them. LaMona (talk) 23:38, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete as promotional. We can do this even if there is borderline notability -- & in fact even if there is even actual notability. WP is not a nadevertising medium.
Delete as promotional. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. - tucoxn\^talk 23:01, 26 November 2014 (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.