Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Porscia S. Yeganeh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 04:16, 1 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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. Sandstein 10:18, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Porscia S. Yeganeh[edit]

Porscia S. Yeganeh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is very promotional and many of the references are to self-published sources. I know nothing about fashion brands, but I see no national or international recognition here and doubt whether this individual meets WP:GNG. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I hope he has the sufficient coverage to keep. Genome$100 (talk) 01:55, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I couldn't find subatantial coverage in reliavle independent sources. FloridaArmy (talk) 09:13, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete lack of substantial coverage showing notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:30, 29 December 2017 (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.