Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monique Alvarez
Appearance
- 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 soft delete. Based on
]Monique Alvarez
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Monique Alvarez (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The sourcing here does not lead to a pass of GNG. It tends towards things like college reporting on her, not the type of fully indepdent and indepth sourcing that passes GNG. There is also a lack of anything that would add up to multiple significant roles in notable productions. A search for additional sources found absolutely nothing. John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:51, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- For what it is worth every edit by the creator of this article was done to this article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:52, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- The indepth description of her high school activities, totally without any sourcing, that were in earlier versions of this article make me suspect the creator of the article may have had a personal connection to Ms. Alvarez. It is hard to say exactly how personal the connection was.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:55, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for ]
- Logs:
2011-02 ↻ restored
,2011-02 ✗
G6
- 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.