Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adele Gilani

: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. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:52, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

=[[:Adele Gilani]]=

:{{la|Adele Gilani}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Adele_Gilani Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Adele Gilani}})

Fails every single criterion in WP:ARTIST. Mduvekot (talk) 12:45, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:25, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:25, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:25, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:08, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 17:39, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Strong Delete Lousy, weak sources that do not come within a million miles of any kind of notability. I also just removed about six sources that were actually from Youtube, but were labelled as being published by someone else to hide their origin. My guess is that this is a professionally written promo piece. I have a clear sense that there is zero notability.104.163.153.14 (talk) 04:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Delete - fails WP:ARTIST. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:28, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Keep - passes WP:GNG. Detailed piece in NYTimes plus several other references to reliable sources. Antonioatrylia (talk) 08:55, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

: References should be considered in context. The [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/05/fashion/weddings/finding-common-ground-and-a-dog-named-pancho.html?_r=1 NYT wedding section] is not a source of serious critical attention for an artist. It is celebrity gossip. Mduvekot (talk) 12:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Delete. Insufficient in-depth, multiple, independent sources to give notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:25, 24 June 2017 (UTC).

: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.