Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenny Gomez

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny Gomez

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

One article in the Wall Street Journal does not make someone notable, and I could find no other mention of her. I also searched for sources about her place of work, 77th Shoe Repair, and I also could not find sources. Fences&Windows 00:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 00:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- Fences&Windows 00:04, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete an article on a shoe shiner!? Come on. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:43, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A bootblack can be notable, especially if he or she is humble and lovable. As for Ms. Gomez, when she gets an animated TV series, then she'll be notable. EEng (talk) 01:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominat0r. Tbh®tch^Talk ^© Happy New Year 00:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I've worked on lots of biographies here at Wikipedia, always people who are rich, famous, well-connected, driving in fancy limousines and attending lavish parties. Gomez is different because she's, well, one of us: hardworking, underpaid (in Wikipedia, nonpaid). And I thought it was cool she got recognized in the Wall Street Journal. But I'll leave it up to the community's judgment about whether to keep her in. I'm hoping she stays, but I'm not voting here, but it's really up to you fine people.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 02:01, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete mostly looks like a copy of the good parts of the W.S.J. article on her. Sumsum2010·T·C 05:27, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete She sounds like a wonderful person. But we can't have an article on every wonderful person who gets a human interest story written about them. When I was 12, I had an article written about me because of a poem I wrote. My sister had a piece on CNN a number of years ago because she was a bone-marrow donor. I bet I could open any random paper and find a similar "feel good" story about a nice guy doing his job and flying under the radar. That's not enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Wickedjacob (talk) 06:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nice person, but fails WP:BIO. Lacks multiple reliable sources with significant coverage. Not everyone with one heart warming article needs to be permanently included in an encyclopedia. Edison (talk) 19:33, 29 December 2010 (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.