| Quicklinks |
|---|
| Other Excellent articles on CSD |
Original Article
Madeleine Davenport is a noted Fashion Journalist, best well known for her work with Distill Magazine. Famed for wearing bows, she is a regular fixture on London's party scene and a notorious Modeliser.
NOTE: A few hits for "Madeleine Davenport" Fashion, so apparently she really is a fashion journalist.
Nomination Criteria
A7
An article about a real person, an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. A7 applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people and organizations themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software and so on. A7 does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.
Deletion Options
| rationale | Count | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Agree with ratioinale to speedy delete. | 14 | 22.6 |
| Disagree with rationale. Notability asserted, per policy doesn't have to be supported, but deletable by other criteria. | 2 | 3.2 |
| Disagree with rationale. Notability asserted, per policy doesn't have to be supported, but this is a case where IAR applies. | 1 | 1.6 |
| Disagree with speedy deletion.. Notability asserted, per policy doesn't have to be supported, (should be PRODDED, sent to AFD, or kept.) | 45 | 72.6 |
Survey Comments
| Common rationale | Count |
|---|---|
| AFD | 3 |
- PROD, then AFD - non-notable, but asserted
- unsure about this one - I'd need to do more research
- Not actually asserting notability - just describing someone as "notable" is not an assertion of "why"
- Unsourced BLP but it's not overly negative, asserts notability so no CSD really applies.
- A7 is probably a stretch, I'd be more comfortable with a PROD/AfD.
- Maybe PROD, but I think AFD would be more fitting
- PROD as claim of notability ("noted journalist") though I wouldn't mind betting she's as notable as I am...
- no plausible claim to notability -- borderline, possibly prod.
- Very borderline, but a claim of "famed" would be just enough I'd prod. Neither being a journalist nor a "regular fixture" anywhere are claims of notability.
- I'd see if working with Distill was notable in itself, despite "notability is not inherited" - I routinely AIR on inherited notability. I would also research to see if she's otherwise notable and add that. Otherwise I'd be safe and PROD.
- "Noted fashion journalist" is a pretty clear assertion of notability.
- tag for notability and unreferenced
- Disagree with radio button text but know what you mean; shouldn't use "notability" but that it "indicates importance"
Balloonman's analysis
"Famed" "notorious" "noted" "well known" these are all claims at importance/significance, thus A7 does not apply.
She is apparently a real person and an actual fashion journalist. This would fail a at AFD, so I would send it to PROD first. Give the author a chance to establish the bona fides of this person. If they can't or they remove the PROD tag, then take it to AFD.
| Quicklinks |
|---|
| Other Excellent articles on CSD |
Original Article
Madeleine Davenport is a noted Fashion Journalist, best well known for her work with Distill Magazine. Famed for wearing bows, she is a regular fixture on London's party scene and a notorious Modeliser.
NOTE: A few hits for "Madeleine Davenport" Fashion, so apparently she really is a fashion journalist.
Nomination Criteria
A7
An article about a real person, an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from verifiability and reliability of sources, and is a lower standard than notability. A7 applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people and organizations themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software and so on. A7 does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source. If the claim's credibility is unclear, you can improve the article yourself, propose deletion, or list the article at articles for deletion.
Deletion Options
| rationale | Count | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Agree with ratioinale to speedy delete. | 14 | 22.6 |
| Disagree with rationale. Notability asserted, per policy doesn't have to be supported, but deletable by other criteria. | 2 | 3.2 |
| Disagree with rationale. Notability asserted, per policy doesn't have to be supported, but this is a case where IAR applies. | 1 | 1.6 |
| Disagree with speedy deletion.. Notability asserted, per policy doesn't have to be supported, (should be PRODDED, sent to AFD, or kept.) | 45 | 72.6 |
Survey Comments
| Common rationale | Count |
|---|---|
| AFD | 3 |
- PROD, then AFD - non-notable, but asserted
- unsure about this one - I'd need to do more research
- Not actually asserting notability - just describing someone as "notable" is not an assertion of "why"
- Unsourced BLP but it's not overly negative, asserts notability so no CSD really applies.
- A7 is probably a stretch, I'd be more comfortable with a PROD/AfD.
- Maybe PROD, but I think AFD would be more fitting
- PROD as claim of notability ("noted journalist") though I wouldn't mind betting she's as notable as I am...
- no plausible claim to notability -- borderline, possibly prod.
- Very borderline, but a claim of "famed" would be just enough I'd prod. Neither being a journalist nor a "regular fixture" anywhere are claims of notability.
- I'd see if working with Distill was notable in itself, despite "notability is not inherited" - I routinely AIR on inherited notability. I would also research to see if she's otherwise notable and add that. Otherwise I'd be safe and PROD.
- "Noted fashion journalist" is a pretty clear assertion of notability.
- tag for notability and unreferenced
- Disagree with radio button text but know what you mean; shouldn't use "notability" but that it "indicates importance"
Balloonman's analysis
"Famed" "notorious" "noted" "well known" these are all claims at importance/significance, thus A7 does not apply.
She is apparently a real person and an actual fashion journalist. This would fail a at AFD, so I would send it to PROD first. Give the author a chance to establish the bona fides of this person. If they can't or they remove the PROD tag, then take it to AFD.