Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lika O: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Moharavi (talk | contribs)
→‎Lika O: Reply
→‎Lika O: Reply
Line 27: Line 27:
* '''Comment''': @[[User:Moharavi|Moharavi]] Medium.com can’t establish notability as per [[WP:MEDIUM]] and the [https://www.nbclosangeles.com/california-live/check-out-this-vibey-new-l-a-restaurant/3222364/?amp=1 other source] that you added is a video that obviously can’t make her notable. Also, I don’t think this article is being targeted; rather, it seems you are just promoting her. [[User:Grabup|<span style="color:blue;">Grab</span><span style="color:red; font-size:larger;">Up</span>]] - [[User talk:Grabup|<span style="color:green;">Talk</span>]] 16:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
* '''Comment''': @[[User:Moharavi|Moharavi]] Medium.com can’t establish notability as per [[WP:MEDIUM]] and the [https://www.nbclosangeles.com/california-live/check-out-this-vibey-new-l-a-restaurant/3222364/?amp=1 other source] that you added is a video that obviously can’t make her notable. Also, I don’t think this article is being targeted; rather, it seems you are just promoting her. [[User:Grabup|<span style="color:blue;">Grab</span><span style="color:red; font-size:larger;">Up</span>]] - [[User talk:Grabup|<span style="color:green;">Talk</span>]] 16:56, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
*:Sir @GrabUp, If you know that Medium.com is not notable, then why have you mentioned "the Medium article as analysed good" I am humbly request a fare voting process, Please stay away, because your intention is not good. I totally accept if other person voted against it. [[User:Moharavi|Moharavi]] ([[User talk:Moharavi|talk]]) 17:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
*:Sir @GrabUp, If you know that Medium.com is not notable, then why have you mentioned "the Medium article as analysed good" I am humbly request a fare voting process, Please stay away, because your intention is not good. I totally accept if other person voted against it. [[User:Moharavi|Moharavi]] ([[User talk:Moharavi|talk]]) 17:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
*::Moharavi, please [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith|assume good faith]] of GrabUp. <span style="font-family: times new romans;">[[User:Industrial Insect|Industrial Insect]] [[User talk:Industrial Insect|(talk)]]</span> 17:32, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:32, 22 May 2024

Lika O (edit | 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)

Requested by Demeter39G, Here: The article does not meet the notability criteria and merit. The 1 source is not a reliable source that verifies notability. It is a forum like site for local community, which serves as self published blog. http://ruhollywood.com/2018/11/12/miss-russian-united-states/

4 source is a self published interview on an ads website, not reliable secondary source at all. http://www.spektrummagazine.com/fashion/getting-to-know-lika-osipova/

6 source is an article on a gossips site about dating life of a Russian media person, barelly mentioning the figure of the Wikipedia. https://www.eg.ru/showbusiness/66399/

Sources 7 and 8 are different links to the same poster to the city of the city. It is rather a primary sourse not a secondary source to verify notability. https://www.weho.org/home/showdocument?id=26793

Source 9 - a link to the so called LAF.It is not a film festival, it is a monthly paid competition, not recognized in media or the professional community. The link only mentions name of the person, and does not provide any evidence to verify notability. https://www.lafilmawards.net/single-post/june-2021

To summarize- 6 out of 9 sources used for the page do not meet even closely any possible notability verifications. The figure has barely any professional credits, zero recognition in American or Russian media beyond a self proclaimed pop star status. GrabUp - Talk 05:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Delete: Based on my review, I found no in-depth coverage from multiple independent, reliable sources. Most of the cited sources are unreliable or fail to establish notability due to their lack of detailed coverage. I also searched for sources but found nothing that meets the criteria of WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 06:09, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [reply]

As per @Cullen328 recommendation at Teahouse. I already voted by nominating this article. GrabUp - Talk 06:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Grabup, because you simply copy and pasted the other users rationale from the talk page, your own vote is probably okay here. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's fine. Cullen was explaining about both sorts of cases, the ones where it would be ok and the ones where it would be irritating. This is not the one where it would be irritating. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Nothing found for sourcing, this seems to suggest she might not even be a celebrity [1]. This is all I could find, a photo [2]. I agree with the nom, sources used are not helpful in establishing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 13:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Medium article is just an amazing analysis and a major exposé. Maybe she also paid for this Wikipedia article? GrabUp - Talk 13:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: This article was developed on 23 October 2019‎, if you check the article history there were many anonymous edits without a reference which was been undo by many other Wikipedia editors to protect it.

As mentioned in the previous vote, the Medium article as analysed good, but there many Medium article which mentioned by the concern person works, I have also added one article of it. It seems that this article has been targeted by anonymous person.Moharavi (talk)