Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dayang Nurfaizah

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 keep. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dayang Nurfaizah[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails Notablity, seems Promotinol. Sturdyankit (chat) 03:01, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — a quick search reveals numerous articles in English about her in Malaysian publications (e.g. here, here, here, and here) along with what appear to be more in Malay. I can't speak well to their reliability and substantive independence, but the volume of articles alone from different outlets in recent years suggests she indeed is notable. WhinyTheYounger (talk) 03:49, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

well, I agree with you; Google search give some results about her but I don't think these websites are reliable enough. These websites are look like PR or black hat SEO sites.Sturdyankit (chat) 04:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Malay Mail is a 123-year-old paper that seems to have a fine reputation. I'm also seeing apparent articles about her (e.g. here) in Harian Metro, though these are in Malay, which I don't speak. So it does seem she meets notability requirements through independent, reliable sources. It is also worth noting that both Malay and Indonesian Wikipedia have articles on her as well. WhinyTheYounger (talk) 04:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As a native speaker of Malay, I think we can added more English references in addition of Malay references. This person is notable and I don't think it is seems to be promotional or advertising and I disagree with your proposal to delete this article.–Fandi89 (talk) 00:35, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:04, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:04, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such as national newspapers which have been identified in this discussion so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:43, 1 December 2020 (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.