Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carrie Fairfield

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. Proto ► 11:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carrie Fairfield

Carrie Fairfield (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

• Delete - fails WP:N as I can find no independent sources of which the subject was the subject. The article's creator has been inserting links to the subject's website in various drag-related articles, leading me to believe that the editor may be the subject. Otto4711 20:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - per WP:COI. Jokestress 20:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, no independent non-trivial sources, which is unacceptable for an article of a living person Alf photoman 21:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
• KeepWhat exactly does one have to do to make this a legit entry? The personality - Carrie Fairfield - is indeed the namesake behind a very well known resource for the art of female impersonation and drag pageantry in the United States. If you search for articles on the topic - it's in the highest hit. The site/personality is also quoted in places across this site as well as images being located on this site branded by the site's watermark.

• Please read WP:BIO and WP:N. The crux of the problem is that there appear to be no verifiable third-party sources attesting to the subject's notability. Otto4711 22:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
• I have added additional indepth information on the creation of the character and more of the history of the website and it's popularity. Please review and research the name and the influence it has had on the drag community since 1999. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jnova1974 (talk • contribs) 23:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

• It's not my responsibility to research this subject matter. It's your responsibility as the creator and as the person seeking to keep the article to provide multiple independent third-party sources that attest to the subject's notability. The current article has no sources. Otto4711 23:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment: If you have newspaper articles about the subject, or an IMDb listing, or television interviews, those are reliable sources that can be cited. Otherwise, the article as it stands does not meet notability guidelines. Jokestress 02:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

• Not that I don't agree with your point but just FYI IMDB is not a reliable source. Otto4711 02:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

If the resource, or the use of the name, or site, is more famous than the actual person, perhaps the article should be moved accordingly--since apparently there are references available for that use, per the above comments.DGG 03:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

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.