Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebekah Teasdale (2nd nomination)

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. JohnCD (talk) 20:17, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rebekah Teasdale

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

BLP on a glamour model and DJ; there's very little sourcing which indicates significant notability, with the main secondary source being a passing mention in the Peterlee Star. One previous nomination - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebekah Teasdale - closed as no consensus ten months ago; keep votes were apparently on procedural grounds, and there doesn't seem to have been much support for the article itself. Shimgray | talk | 19:43, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I'm surprised to read the previous AfD nomination. To think an article with BLP concerns could be kept "on procedural grounds" is somewhat distasteful. There is a lack of reliable, secondary sources, and this makes it nearly impossible to verify anything. PeterSymonds (talk) 19:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"BLP concerns"? No such concerns were raised in the prior AfD, it was just a mass nomination. Many of those AfDs in the mass nom were closed as no consensus, some appropriate ones were re-nommed based on that specific BLP instead of by mass deletion whim. I don't see any BLP "concerns" in the current version either, whether or not it survives.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 02:52, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 March 11. Snotbot t • c » 20:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd transcluded the first AFD by accident. Now fixed! Shimgray | talk | 20:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:07, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per the substantive comments, particularly my own, in the original AFD. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 00:12, 12 March 2012 (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.