- 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. Vanamonde ( Talk) 19:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Diana Davis (news personality)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Diana Davis (news personality) ( | 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)
Résumé-like
WP:BLP of a mid-market local television journalist, not
properly referenced as passing our notability criteria for journalists. As always, local television journalists are not "inherently" notable just because a staff profile on the self-published website of their own employer technically verifies that they exist -- they have to be the subject of substantial coverage in sources other than their own employers. But three of the four footnotes here come from her own employer, and the only one that comes from another media outlet is just a human interest interview in which she's answering personal questions about her own perspective in Q&A format, which is not a GNG-assisting source as it represents her speaking about herself rather than being spoken or written about by other people.
There's a claim here that she won a regional Emmy for her journalism, which would be a legitimate notability claim if the article were referenced properly, but is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have more than just directly affiliated
primary sourcing.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Arkansas. Bearcat ( talk) 18:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment unsure if the Emmy makes her notable. I had hope for this article
[1] but I think it's a different person.
Oaktree b (
talk)
20:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, I tried to find a citation for the Emmy and was not able to find any details/news articles for it. DaffodilOcean ( talk) 00:11, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete On air personality for a TV station serving a small metro area (~150K population). I can find no independent sources. Lamona ( talk) 18:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete this article was apparently created and edited solely by a banned user (sock) so it is eligible for WP:G5, but since the AfD was created I'll comment here. Even if the subject is notable it's probably easiest to just delete the article and have a valid user create it. - SpuriousQ ( talk) 22:15, 10 December 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 delete. Vanamonde ( Talk) 19:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Diana Davis (news personality)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Diana Davis (news personality) ( | 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)
Résumé-like
WP:BLP of a mid-market local television journalist, not
properly referenced as passing our notability criteria for journalists. As always, local television journalists are not "inherently" notable just because a staff profile on the self-published website of their own employer technically verifies that they exist -- they have to be the subject of substantial coverage in sources other than their own employers. But three of the four footnotes here come from her own employer, and the only one that comes from another media outlet is just a human interest interview in which she's answering personal questions about her own perspective in Q&A format, which is not a GNG-assisting source as it represents her speaking about herself rather than being spoken or written about by other people.
There's a claim here that she won a regional Emmy for her journalism, which would be a legitimate notability claim if the article were referenced properly, but is not "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have more than just directly affiliated
primary sourcing.
Bearcat (
talk)
18:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Arkansas. Bearcat ( talk) 18:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment unsure if the Emmy makes her notable. I had hope for this article
[1] but I think it's a different person.
Oaktree b (
talk)
20:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, I tried to find a citation for the Emmy and was not able to find any details/news articles for it. DaffodilOcean ( talk) 00:11, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete On air personality for a TV station serving a small metro area (~150K population). I can find no independent sources. Lamona ( talk) 18:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete this article was apparently created and edited solely by a banned user (sock) so it is eligible for WP:G5, but since the AfD was created I'll comment here. Even if the subject is notable it's probably easiest to just delete the article and have a valid user create it. - SpuriousQ ( talk) 22:15, 10 December 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.