- 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.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); September 2, 2014; 21:00 (UTC)
- Natalie Duddridge ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP of a television journalist working in a single media market, which relies entirely on primary sources such as her profile on the website of the television station she works for, and video clips of news reports in which she's the reporter, not the reportee, thus failing to be coverage in which she's the subject. "Reported on dangerous intersections" and "photobombed by topless woman" are not claims of notability that pass WP:NMEDIA, needless to say, and a television reporter needs more than to just exist to qualify for an article on Wikipedia. I'd be happy to withdraw this if real sources started showing up, but that ain't what these sources are. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 02:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (warn) @ 20:29, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete No significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. TFD ( talk) 06:07, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per Bearcat, who is spot on. In order for Duddridge to be notable, she needs to be the subject of the coverage used as references. Upjav ( talk) 17:48, 2 September 2014 (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.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); September 2, 2014; 21:00 (UTC)
- Natalie Duddridge ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP of a television journalist working in a single media market, which relies entirely on primary sources such as her profile on the website of the television station she works for, and video clips of news reports in which she's the reporter, not the reportee, thus failing to be coverage in which she's the subject. "Reported on dangerous intersections" and "photobombed by topless woman" are not claims of notability that pass WP:NMEDIA, needless to say, and a television reporter needs more than to just exist to qualify for an article on Wikipedia. I'd be happy to withdraw this if real sources started showing up, but that ain't what these sources are. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 02:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 12:41, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
-
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (warn) @ 20:29, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete No significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. TFD ( talk) 06:07, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per Bearcat, who is spot on. In order for Duddridge to be notable, she needs to be the subject of the coverage used as references. Upjav ( talk) 17:48, 2 September 2014 (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.