Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julie Fredrickson

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 as an article created by a blocked/banned user. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nickaang. --B (talk) 00:45, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Julie Fredrickson

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

Already removed on source that was inaccurately attributed to a fact, but looking at these sources, they seem user driven or unreliable. Appears to be a vanity article. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 19:45, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just referenced the fact from a book and also from WWD and The New York Times. She is a well known figure in fashion space. Kindly, check.--TankThank (talk) 12:38, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've put the source back using proper citation and i think the topic passes
WP:GNG.--TankThank (talk) 19:49, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete No significant coverage in reliable sources. Fails GNG. INeverCry 20:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've put some more references from well known newspapers and magazines. Please, re-check.--TankThank (talk) 13:17, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I also think the coverage in reliable sources is lacking. The one source that I think is truly reliable that was cited is by Huffington Post but I feel the content of that article in the Huffington Post does not help to establish the notability of this article. —Σosthenes12 ^Talk 20:43, 22 May 2013 (UTC)Sosthenes12[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've cited from sources like
WP:BASIC. Also, there are books where she has been mentioned including Milwaukee Magazine.--TankThank (talk) 12:16, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep I've looked at the sources in the article. Whilst a couple are subject-written, and many of them are not in-depth coverage, I think the subject certainly passes general notability as she and her work are discussed by third parties, her role in fashion blogging is certainly acknowledged, and she does have a certain notoriety and has been a known name since the mid-2000s. Certainly well known enough in 2006 to be named as the highest profile victim of Glamour (magazine)'s Glamour Don'ts launch [1]. Certainly I've seen enough that I have no objection to there being an article on her, although no very strong feelings either way. Mabalu (talk) 15:15, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, significant amount of referencing, and coverage among secondary sources. — Cirt (talk) 01:43, 24 May 2013 (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.