- 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 speedy deleted per WP:G5. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🎉 ( HAPPY 2022) 01:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Cameron ghassemi
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Cameron ghassemi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Looks to be a promo piece with "journalistic" sources of dubious reliability. The first source, USAWire [1], looks to be a press release / PR piece, with the author working for a PR bureau [2]. The second source, LAProgressive [3] isn't any better. The author, "Seja Desai", doesn't seem to exist, and her picture [4] is a cropped part of a generic "Asian beauty" image [5] taken in Iran [6]. The final source, Forbes [7] is nearly identical to the first one, and has no author at all.
![[4]](https://www.laprogressive.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/sejal-230.jpg){kind=link}
![[5]](https://theartistryofyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/bardia-hashemirad-420744-unsplash-scaled.jpg){kind=link}
Looking for better sources gave me only this, yet another PRwire message. All in all, seems to be someone keen to promote themselves and savvy enough to find places which look at first legitimate but are actually just empty shells, rehashing PR messages. Fails WP:N. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. A bit promotional and not close to passing GNG.-- Mvqr ( talk) 14:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, nowhere near notable, clearly self-promotional. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 14:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The claim of notability as an influencer is extremely weak and the required in-depth reliable and verifiable coverage in independent sources is lacking. Alansohn ( talk) 14:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Sources don't show notability. —
rsjaffe
🗣️
16:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- And originator of the article
Dianarossok has a history of being a paid editor, though has not disclosed being paid for this article. —
rsjaffe
🗣️
16:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Originator of article part of Fatima.Innovative sock farm. I was going to tag it G5 speedy deletion, but since it's already snowing here, will just leave it to die a normal death. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- And originator of the article
Dianarossok has a history of being a paid editor, though has not disclosed being paid for this article. —
rsjaffe
🗣️
16:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Sources do not show notability. What even is the fifth reference? It's not Forbes, but "Forbes Global News", by "Forbes Global, LLC". I couldn't easily figure out how it was connected to Forbes, or if it was connected at all, but there are no bylines and it seems very shady. Knuthove ( talk) 23:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, speedily. This is a borderline hoax. Students aren't notable just by virtue of being a student of any school or profession. Further, this is all paid for spam - as in, not a word of the sources is true because they're pay-for-publications and allow anyone to publish anything with absolutely no vetting. CUPIDICAE💕 16:21, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete - zero third-party [[WP:RS|reliable sources with coverage. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:54, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- I am tagging it for G5 speedy delete. No need for more people to have to read this cruft.—
rsjaffe
🗣️
17:10, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- It's gone now. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 speedy deleted per WP:G5. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🎉 ( HAPPY 2022) 01:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Cameron ghassemi
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Cameron ghassemi ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Looks to be a promo piece with "journalistic" sources of dubious reliability. The first source, USAWire [1], looks to be a press release / PR piece, with the author working for a PR bureau [2]. The second source, LAProgressive [3] isn't any better. The author, "Seja Desai", doesn't seem to exist, and her picture [4] is a cropped part of a generic "Asian beauty" image [5] taken in Iran [6]. The final source, Forbes [7] is nearly identical to the first one, and has no author at all.
Looking for better sources gave me only this, yet another PRwire message. All in all, seems to be someone keen to promote themselves and savvy enough to find places which look at first legitimate but are actually just empty shells, rehashing PR messages. Fails WP:N. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Fram ( talk) 13:44, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. A bit promotional and not close to passing GNG.-- Mvqr ( talk) 14:04, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, nowhere near notable, clearly self-promotional. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 14:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The claim of notability as an influencer is extremely weak and the required in-depth reliable and verifiable coverage in independent sources is lacking. Alansohn ( talk) 14:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Sources don't show notability. —
rsjaffe
🗣️
16:15, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- And originator of the article
Dianarossok has a history of being a paid editor, though has not disclosed being paid for this article. —
rsjaffe
🗣️
16:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Originator of article part of Fatima.Innovative sock farm. I was going to tag it G5 speedy deletion, but since it's already snowing here, will just leave it to die a normal death. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 17:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- And originator of the article
Dianarossok has a history of being a paid editor, though has not disclosed being paid for this article. —
rsjaffe
🗣️
16:19, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Sources do not show notability. What even is the fifth reference? It's not Forbes, but "Forbes Global News", by "Forbes Global, LLC". I couldn't easily figure out how it was connected to Forbes, or if it was connected at all, but there are no bylines and it seems very shady. Knuthove ( talk) 23:40, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, speedily. This is a borderline hoax. Students aren't notable just by virtue of being a student of any school or profession. Further, this is all paid for spam - as in, not a word of the sources is true because they're pay-for-publications and allow anyone to publish anything with absolutely no vetting. CUPIDICAE💕 16:21, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete - zero third-party [[WP:RS|reliable sources with coverage. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:54, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- I am tagging it for G5 speedy delete. No need for more people to have to read this cruft.—
rsjaffe
🗣️
17:10, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- It's gone now. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 21:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- 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.