Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iris Thomsen

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. Jenks24 (talk) 08:05, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Iris Thomsen

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

Apparently part of a walled garden of articles relating to Tara Teng and her life and interests. Virtually the entire biographical content of this article relates to a meeting with Teng. Kelly ^hi! 13:28, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

limited notability redirect to Miss World Denmark Govindaharihari (talk) 18:58, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment She was crowned Miss World Denmark in 2012, but I'm not sure if country-level pageant winners are particularly notable. If so, the article could be stubified. However, it would probably stay a stub forever. clpo13_(talk) 19:01, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Oh, dear. It is very clear why this individual has an article. A certain editor has been on an unpaid advocacy spree for Teng. Not every person to have ever had the "honour" of being in the company of Tara Teng is notable (Teng is actually the main topic and purpose of this page). This page makes me feel rather sick and disturbed. AusLondonder (talk) 21:26, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete could not have said this better myself Legacypac (talk) 06:40, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 22:13, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 22:13, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Performing-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 22:13, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 22:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect per Clpo13. This one is of extremely dubious notability. Montanabw ^(talk) 23:13, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as sufficiently notable. Note Danish sources such as the Danish Miss World site mention her. She appears to be the first person of Indian origin to win the title unless Google is really bad. (" My mother was born in Mumbai, India, the youngest of seven, with one brother and five sisters. Her family were members of the Jewish community in India. ") with the paucity of articles about women on Wikipedia, deleting this one might seem poorly advised. Collect (talk) 01:06, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Collect - are you seriously saying we should keep her because a Miss World site mentions her? AusLondonder (talk) 02:29, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I did not claim that, why the effing hell do you try implying that I did? Collect (talk) 02:41, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Then why the 'effing hell' did you say this: "Note Danish sources such as the Danish Miss World site mention her." AusLondonder (talk) 02:55, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the fact the person is Danish and one would expect many newspapers in Denmark are actually in Denmark elides you? Collect (talk) 03:00, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Last time I checked the "Danish Miss World site" is not a newspaper. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Stop being so misleading. AusLondonder (talk) 03:06, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I never called that site a newspaper, and your responses here are now on the ragged edge of animals under a bridge. A person born in Rumania would likely have newspapers in Rumania which are written in Rumanian be a source, as well as organizations which are in Rumania and written in Rumanian be a source, and books from Rumania written in Rumania be a source. Better now? Collect (talk) 12:17, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Collect there's no article on her in other wiki language projects. If she has made "unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment" you could ask WikiProject Denmark to write an article on her on da.wikipedia.org, then get an English translation. -- Callinus (talk) 13:30, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Might you show me a policy or guideline saying "persons who do not have an article in their own native Wikipedia are automatically not notable for the English Wikipedia" or that Tara Teng I a reason for deletion of any BLP? If you do not like that BLP, bring it to AfD, but it is an improper reason for deletion of this BLP. I note further that the other women mentioned in the BLP but whose BLPs were not started by Neelix are not at AfD by the way so I doubt that Tara Teng is the reason for this AfD.. Collect (talk) 13:45, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Collect Look up ""miss denmark" site:.dk" on google news - I get 22 results in Danish newspapers, none specifically about this woman. Try "Iris Thomsen" on Google News - out of the seven results, two are about a German artist. You say that "Danish sources" mention Iris Thomsen - yet none are indexed on Google News.

There is no demonstration that this woman has any notability over any of the others on Miss Denmark - all of whom do not have articles (all of the others have press releases on missdanmark.dk - because missdanmark.dk publishes promotional puffery on all their models). If

WP:OTHER is not a good argument in deletion discussions.-- Callinus (talk) 14:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Collect Frankly I am bloody sick of your misleading conduct. You said ""Note Danish sources such as the Danish Miss World site mention her" and only introduced the concept of newspapers in a reply to me when I said "are you seriously saying we should keep her because a Miss World site mentions her?" Your reply was "Perhaps the fact the person is Danish and one would expect many newspapers in Denmark are actually in Denmark elides you?" You had not mentioned newspapers until then. Moreover, other editors have proven they don't anyway. So why did you say that they did? Are you being dishonest on purpose or are you just confused? By the way, it is spelt Romania. AusLondonder (talk) 21:04, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When "correcting" someone, one ought to make sure that they are actually "correcting" that person. [1] Both spellings are legal. [2]. Meanwhile you are not officially, in my opinion, in the territory of the proverbial bridge. Collect (talk) 21:11, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I won't bother responding to your latest crap. You were wrong about Danish coverage. You were wrong about when you said newspapers. You are wrong about 'Rumania', which is considered archaic. "Romania became the predominant spelling around 1975. Romania is also the official English-language spelling used by the Romanian government". Best get your facts right before you open your mouth AusLondonder (talk) 21:49, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. I was born quite before 1975. 2. "Rumania" was used in some cases to avoid confusion with the Romansch peoples. 3. Some places still use "Rumania" as the spelling. 4. Major dictionaries allow for both spellings. 5. When you start spouting about "facts" you should really make sure what you aver as pure fact is such. 6. You seem to posit that I must know only English here. 7. You are now well and truly a bridge denizen. Collect (talk) 23:07, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1. I think that is quite obvious. 2. Not relevant. 3. Examples? 4. Never in the first instance and only for clarification purposes. 5. I could say the exact same thing to you!. 6. Rumania is not the proper term. It is România in Romanian. 7. It takes one to know one. AusLondonder (talk) 23:14, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - seriously creepy. —Мандичка^YO 😜 03:38, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete English Google News has only seven results - no justification of lasting impact. Article does not document any "unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment" (WP:NMODEL), instead only discussing her meeting the "great" Tara Teng. -- Callinus (talk) 13:30, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - obviously, BMK (talk) 15:10, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails notability criteria. - Cwobeel (talk) 19:48, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The sheer, enormous amount of harassment piled upon someone in this thread for choosing to vote Keep is disgusting. --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 23:20, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What you call "disgusting harassment" is the process recommended by WP:AFD "AfDs are a place for rational discussion of whether an article is able to meet Wikipedia's article guidelines and policies. Reasonable editors will often disagree, but valid arguments will be given more weight than unsupported statements". It is only reasonable that other editors will challenge why an editor claimed the subject had received Danish newspaper coverage when they haven't. It is only reasonable that other editors will call out an editor who engages in misleading conduct, namely stating "Note Danish sources such as the Danish Miss World site mention her" and pretending they meant newspaper. What is the disgusting harassment you refer to? Also, this is not a WP:VOTE. AusLondonder (talk) 23:31, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I see you have quite an issue with perceived "harassment" on Wikipedia. Your user page states "I archive every and all harassment made against me" and practically all your userboxes relate to "harassment". AusLondonder (talk) 23:33, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Explain, precisely, how "seriously creepy" is reasonable discussion? --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 00:16, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't harassment. Who voting keep was harassed by that comment? AusLondonder (talk) 00:20, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What was it then!? Constructive criticism? Oh, wait, that must be a valid argument!/s Except it isn't a valid argument and sadly, this whole AfD looks to be either canvassed or individuals following someone around on Wikipedia. Also, it is a vote. Those articles with the most deletes get deleted. Have a good day. --MurderByDeadcopy^"bang!" 00:37, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But it wasn't directed at anyone voting keep? You said "The sheer, enormous amount of harassment piled upon someone in this thread for choosing to vote Keep is disgusting". The creepy comment was not piled upon a keep "voter" AusLondonder (talk) 00:39, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The walled garden/stalker site around Tara Teng, of which this is part, IS seriously creepy, so much so that its a big part of an ArbCom case [3] seeking to revoke the creators admin tools.Seriously Neelix had in the Teng article how she has been "asked on dates", "never joined an online dating site" and that she "likes Pacific sunsets. It was a 100,000+ byte article. Legacypac (talk) 23:16, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you will admit you are wrong now User:MurderByDeadcopy, that no harassment of anyone (other than Tara Teng) has taken place and apologise? AusLondonder (talk) 23:24, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a thinly referenced article about a non-notable beauty pageant contestant who has not received significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. All we have here are a few brief passing mentions, which do not establish notability and do not provide the basis for a true biography. We should not be keeping articles which are the products of one editor's unseemly obsessions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:44, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nominator's rationale and others subsequent. The Drover's Wife (talk) 01:15, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No matter how open you make a search on her name, there is simply not enough sources found to meet WP:BASIC. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 01:32, 16 November 2015 (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.