Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenna Rose (4th nomination)

Jenna Rose

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

I have nominated this article for deletion twice before. One debate resulted in delete, and the other resulted in keep. I am nominating it for a fourth time because I feel that enough time has passed to make it clear that this article meets all three criteria of a BLP1E, and should thus be deleted. A lot of the information in the article is only mentioned in local news, uncited, and cited with links that no longer work. This article has become a Pseudo-biography, and I feel that most of the information presented in the article is not encyclopedic. Rogerthat94 (talk) 08:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it is incorrect that a musical artist with multiple sourcable projects is a BLPE. As estabalished at earlier AFD's this person with sourcable coverage for multiple aspects of her career meets WP:MUSICBIO and WP:ARTIST. With respects, the consensus established by AFD's #2 and #3 were the resyult of a lot of policy and guideline based discussion. I am hoping this repeated return to AFd by the same nominator is not a result of either WP:DONTLIKEIT or WP:KEEPLISTINGTILLITGETSDELETED. That links that worked two years ago may not all be available is a result of linkrot of sources once readily available and previously considered at AFD (and perhaps recoverable through diligent use of the Wayback machine... but loss through linkrot is not a valid rationale for deletion of something previously found notable. I remind the nominator that even with online sources evaporating, their hardcopy equivalents have not vanished from hardcopy archives, and notability is not temporary. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 10:27, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree on the Pseudo-biography topic. Most of the sources and information about the artist is not really reliable, seams very fake and there is definitely the Conflict of Interests.