Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soludo Marcel

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 speedy delete. Being bold and closing this one early based on WP:SNOW. Missvain (talk) 21:28, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Soludo Marcel

[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)

Blatant UPE article on a very non notable actor and model who fails to satisfy any criterion from WP:NACTOR. A before search literally turns up nothing of substance. Furthermore, they lack in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them thus a major GNG fail as well. Celestina007 (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 22:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This does not fail WP:NACTOR especially because the subject is majorly a model. And I have given reliable sources, including Vogue. Horizonlove (talk) 23:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Horizonlove (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD. [reply]

@Horizonlove, please see WP:NMODEL and show us how they satisfy it. Furthermore you are welcome to bring to this AFD, reliable sources that show the subject of the article satisfies our general notability criteria for inclusion. Celestina007 (talk) 23:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I have been unable to locate any reliable sources to support notability. Of the four sources listed in the article:

The first source is a model agency which brings back a 404 error. The main website does not even mention Soludo Marcel.
The second source is a commercial perfume sales site with no mention of Soludo Marcel.
The third source for Vogue Italy does not even mention him.
The last source is a commercial wedding directory site which does not mention him.

This article has not established notability. Moreover, the article's creator added a personal photo of Soludo Marcel. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- Bias "Delete" comment made another user - Magnolia677 is a user that keeps hounding and his comment should not count to this vote. There have been too many incidents in the past where this user involved himself/herself in my edits without providing explanations of how they landed on pages I've edited, other than looking my edit history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horizonlove (talk • contribs)

Horizonlove and I have not edited the same article in over a year, and the last time we communicated on a talk page was in 2017. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You did not find this page other than looking my edit history as you have always done in the past. And it is easy for our last interaction to have been a year (if it has been a year) as I stopped editing for a period of months. But I have no doubt that you have been keeping an eye on edit history since I last encounter. So again, the votes of other participating users should be accepted, but Magnolia677 should not count. He is too obsessed with me for whatever reason. Horizonlove (talk) 00:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The first link is now a dead link but the website does mention him on their roster. The second site provides proof the model was part of that campaign (in this case "Essenza"). The third site [again] provided proof that this model walked in that fashion show and for the brand designer. The last site names models at the bottom of the page. Horizonlove (talk) 23:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I very carefully checked the four sources that Magnolia677 mentioned. The name "Soludo Marcel" is not mentioned in any of these sources. Not once.--- Possibly (talk) 01:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Possibly. Worse, the male model in the Love Weddings NG shoot is named as Marc Steel, a different person, as far as I can tell. Laplorfill (talk) 01:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete GNG fail. This also appears to be possible promotion; the photo description given by Horizonlove is "A photo taken during a photoshoot session with Soludo Marcel in which the photographer licensed the photo to me.".--- Possibly (talk) 00:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete completely fails WP:GNG the sources are some unknown websites and as per comment by User:Magnolia677,many of these sources dont make even a passing reference to the subject.Ratnahastin (talk) 01:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not meet WP:GNG. Even if the sources supported that claim that they show Marcel (which they do not, see comments above) they would not be the substantial coverage required to meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. The photo is inappropriately "licensed" and I have tagged it on Commons as such. Laplorfill (talk) 01:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - After a BEFORE search, there is no indication that this person meets our notability requirements for WP:GNG nor WP:MODEL, and the article sourcing also does not support notability. Maybe in a few more years, but definitely not now. Netherzone (talk) 01:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete All we have is a couple of images of the person. No reference that appears to mention his name (can't read Italian, sorry) and not even trivial mentions elsewhere. Delete, speedily. --RegentsPark (comment) 02:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete A7 - there are no sources in this article to indicate that this person has any kind of notability - "This person is a model and they do modelling" is not a credible claim of significance. The only source currently in the article is his own modelling agency's website, and a search hasn't turned anything better up. 192.76.8.73 (talk) 10:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - spam article on a completely non-notable person; fails WP:GNG by a long, long way Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per above. -Xclusivzik (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Puff piece. scope_creep^Talk 19:10, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a close call. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2021 (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.