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.
Lean delete Seems like she is only notable for one thing
WP:BLP1E and there is not significant coverage and while the article doesn't discuss criminality, I see her akin to the victim of a crime and with her only being known for her privacy being broken, it seems like a weak reason to have an article. As the coverage seems tabloid, and not sustained, lots of reasons push me towards delete.
CT55555(
talk)
14:24, 4 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:GNG and
WP:BLP1E - reliable sources appear to cover Leviston only in the context of a single event; she appears to otherwise remain, and likely to remain a
low-profile individual; this article gives
undue weight to the event; and the event does not appear to be particularly significant and her role is either not substantial or not well documented. She sued, won, and appears to have eventually collected on the judgement, but there does not appear to be support in reliable sources for an
event article.
Beccaynr (
talk)
20:15, 4 February 2023 (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.
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.
Lean delete Seems like she is only notable for one thing
WP:BLP1E and there is not significant coverage and while the article doesn't discuss criminality, I see her akin to the victim of a crime and with her only being known for her privacy being broken, it seems like a weak reason to have an article. As the coverage seems tabloid, and not sustained, lots of reasons push me towards delete.
CT55555(
talk)
14:24, 4 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:GNG and
WP:BLP1E - reliable sources appear to cover Leviston only in the context of a single event; she appears to otherwise remain, and likely to remain a
low-profile individual; this article gives
undue weight to the event; and the event does not appear to be particularly significant and her role is either not substantial or not well documented. She sued, won, and appears to have eventually collected on the judgement, but there does not appear to be support in reliable sources for an
event article.
Beccaynr (
talk)
20:15, 4 February 2023 (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.