Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tati McQuay

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:56, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tati McQuay (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable singer/dancer/influencer/etc. Sources cited are non-RS, provide passing or no mentions, or consist of interviews and celeb gossip; search finds only more of the same. Fails WP:GNG / WP:ENTERTAINER / WP:MUSICBIO. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:46, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Women, Canada, and United States of America. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:46, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The text of the article does not speak for itself as to notability. Article was moved from article space to draft space, then declined twice, but then moved back to article space by originator. The article has been reference=bombed with 25 low-quality sources, many of which are YouTube. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:14, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete another non-notable influencer. Movies and other roles aren't notable, ACTOR doesn't apply. Not much found for sources. Best I could find was a Rolling Stone article about Dippin Dots and the L2M group she was in, mentioned in passing. Oaktree b (talk) 15:17, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete but repurpose She does fail the GNG on her own, but I think that some of the content on here would belong somewhere else. L2M in itself could be a merged article of the five group members if neither of them are able to make it all on their own; they used to be pretty prominent. InvadingInvader (talk) 01:58, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I will, however, support keeping the article online if during this deletion process, something comes up in which she would meet the GNG. InvadingInvader (talk) 07:24, 6 September 2022 (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.