Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jasmine Shimoda

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Jasmine Shimoda}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Jasmine Shimoda}})

WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE: The subject is a relatively low-profile person and has requested deletion [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=1117825220 here]. gnu57 20:26, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Food and drink. gnu57 20:26, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. Can't see evidence for the level of coverage required to establish notability per Wikipedia guidelines. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• Delete. The notability is borderline, with a couple good sources in the article as well as some routine coverage. I would normally find myself leaning more towards keep, but with the deletion request, possibility of recurring blp issues, and borderline notability I think deletion is the right call. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:56, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• Comment as creator Speedy delete per BLP, I won’t fight about it. Trillfendi (talk) 21:03, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• Speedy delete: Meets WP:A7. RAN1 (talk) 21:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• :RAN1, I think that's a stretch, there is certainly some significant coverage shown in the article. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• ::{{Reply to|ScottishFinnishRadish}} Well she's a chef/restaurant owner with coverage, but I think wellness sections are primary sources. RAN1 (talk) 21:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - so far the best coverage I have found is a 2016 New York Times article about her, her food, and some recipes. I will poke around a little more. DaffodilOcean (talk) 21:38, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• :I can find no additional reliable sources beyond what I added to the article. DaffodilOcean (talk) 21:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. BLP issues appear to remain in the edit history and may have been repeatedly added, which seems to broadly support adding some WP:SALT to the title. Beccaynr (talk) 01:32, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
• :But I would consider changing my !vote if the subject agrees to WP:PROTECT the article as an alternative to deletion. Beccaynr (talk) 01:40, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
• ::The subject of a biography has no say in whether an article is protected - that would be a very poor precedent to set. Furthermore, pre-emptive protection is against policy, and articles are never permanently protected. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:52, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
• :::From my limited view, based only on the edit history that is visible to me, I would go to WP:RFPP and request page protection based on persistent disruptive editing and repeated attempts to add apparent BLP policy violations, not a request for pre-emptive protection. Based on the subject's deletion request, they may not realize we have an alternative to deletion, and they might change their deletion request if the article is protected (perhaps indefinitely, due to the apparent BLP issues), per our policy that may apply to what has happened to this article. This is not intended to give the subject a say in whether the article is protected, but instead an attempt to give them more information about our processes so they can make an informed choice with regard to requesting deletion of the article. Beccaynr (talk) 02:19, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
• ::::I have made a request at RFPP. Beccaynr (talk) 02:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
• :::::Page protection was declined (Special:PermanentLink/1117948424#Jasmine_Shimoda), so deletion appears to be the best option for an article that has needed revdel from its creation and much of its history, and still has BLP violations visible in its history. Beccaynr (talk) 12:28, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:BLP and let's start looking at a SNOW close. As others have stated, her notability is borderline, and there is a request plausibly from the subject to remove the article. I note that the allegations are foundational in the edit history and still appear in diffs despite the extensive revdel. I believe if this is kept all revisions prior to the afd will have to be removed. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 02:31, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.