Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arden Wohl (2nd nomination)

Arden Wohl

Arden Wohl (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Renominated: speedy deleted twice, then deleted by Afd on 6/13/2007. See here for discussion. Article re-added with no additional justification. Fails to meet WP:BIO. Subject made a minimally notable film, at best. Lots of the sources are junk. Ward3001 00:57, 1 September 2007 (UTC) link to original discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arden Wohl fixing re-nom, abstain Ardent^†alk_∈ 01:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

• keep "The person has been the subject of published1 secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.2 " has been covered in an article by Vogue

• Delete, three trivial mentions in Google News Archive, one of them this fashion faux-pas, the other something fannish about the Strokes, one of whom she later dated. I suppose the film work prevents her from being a Paris Hilton, exactly, because she can't be famous for (being famous for nothing in particular), but there's no apparent WP:BIO tripwire here. --Dhartung | Talk 03:50, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I'd like this girl to be notable. She certainly deserves attention. But there's no proof that she is notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia yet. Best of luck to her, but she belongs on MySpace.com, not Wikipedia (for now). OfficeGirl 05:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I also dont feel like her claim to notability is strong enough, considering the coverage she has received Corpx 15:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

• strong keep Wohl was featured in the July edition of Vogue. It should be noted that "someone" deleted this item (about Vogue) from the article..nice try. establishing notability as per the review a few weeks ago which gave a concensus to relist..must we go through this every few weeks. and by the way comparing her to Paris Hilton is sort of slanderous and libelous. Arden Wohl was featured in July 2007 edition of Vogue, fulfilling notability requirments,(see http://parkavenuepeerage.wordpress.com/2007/06/28/the-hills/) she is also mentioned in movie short stub Coven (short film) She is currently working on the Playground Project with George Clooney, I think the article should at least be "unsalted", it was originally "salted", as I am new to all of this and did not know the proper protacol, regarding recreating of an article..I thought if you edited it properly you could remove the deletion tags..sorry this was originally removed because of notability requirments, but Vogue is a highly regarded publication. Tweety21 16:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I removed the deletion review text that Tweety21 pasted here that followed the last AfD for this article. Precious Roy 20:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Item about Vogue (magazine) inserted by Tweety21 on 6/12/2007 has been in the article continously since then. "Someone" never deleted it. As of this moment there are two references in the article to the magazine feature. Nice try. Ward3001 21:07, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete May one day be notable, with all the money her family apparently has and all of her famous friends, but not yet. Precious Roy 20:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

• strong keep clear bias against Wohl, because of socio-economic status (see Roys comment at the bottom where he mentions her money why is this relevant?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.110.247.117 (talk) 21:52, 1 September 2007 (UTC) (this is Tweety21; one !vote per editor)
  • The mention of the money is merely because it's easier for people with money to become "notable." Besides, the article itself makes a mention of the "hefty sum" they got from selling an art collection. Not really any more relevant there than here. Precious Roy 22:30, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete I don't see the notability here either, maybe later. Arienh4^(Talk) 09:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep even though she's a socialite. Bearian 02:20, 3 September 2007 (UTC)