Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tia Michelle Pesando

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. Wifione ^Message 15:05, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tia Michelle Pesando

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:BLP of a writer, making no claim of notability that would get her over WP:WRITER. The initial strongest claim of notability, that she was "the first transgender nun in the Roman Catholic church", turned out to be a misreading of the source — and as things stand now, the article is sourced to a mixture of primary sources and media coverage exclusively local to her own hometown (and it took six full months for somebody to notice that the original creator had also misread those sources and misrepresented what hometown she's actually from, which says something about how much traffic this article is actually generating.) Which means all we've got to work with here for notability purposes is "writer who exists", with not a shred of evidence that she's garnered broad enough attention to satisfy WP:GNG. In addition, there are WP:BLP problems if you have to speculate about a "cryptic message" on social media, and if it is "unknown" whether she's actively promoting the book or not. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 10:13, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In addition to the few local news items, I also found this, but I don't feel there is enough to justify an article. --Michig (talk) 11:01, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I recall encountering a number of articles about TMP online, though the majority seemed to be in the languages of largely-Catholic nations (French, Italian, etc., especially if one includes WordPress articles such as this one) and they were all from the summer. As for traffic, this Wikipedia article only seems to have been garnering ~10 views per day, and if she really is going to become a nun, I'm not sure if TMP would even want that much attention. It was an LGBT-interest thing that got her an article in the first place, so take that however you will. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.81.5 (talk) 05:30, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No relevance. Furthermore, most of the media reception including blog articles as the one linked above turned out to be misinterpretations of the source, too.--Turris Davidica (talk) 14:19, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2014 (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.