Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Chen

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. Mr.Z-man 02:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maria Chen

Maria Chen (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

This is a slightly strange one. This appears to be a disambiguation page that has growed like Topsy into a three-part article on three different Marias Chen. I reached it via Special:Random and attempted to clean it up. But that failed dismally through lack of sources. I can confirm that:

• actress-Maria exists and she appeared in 1995's Miss Hong Kong, but the rest of the information is unverifiable; the result of making this the article would be a sub-stub lacking in a proven assertion of notability
• several fashion-Marias exists, the main one being London-based and Taiwan-born, says Google, rather than American; the rest of the information given appears to be a mix of this US-Maria, the Brixton-Maria and a further Maria, Maria Chen-Pascual. So I'm at a loss as to which makes for a referenced, notability-asserted article
• corporate-Maria exists and gave a few thousand to John Kerry, but her company doesn't appear notable in and of itself; the sources for corporate-Maria are mostly self-listings in directories and the like. This does not make for a promising article

My gut feeling is that this is a tear-it-up and start-again situation: delete the current overgrown dab page and let editors with sources create one or more of these Marias as required. But there's nothing I could make of them within Wikipedia standards. ➨ REDVEЯS is a satellite and will be set alight 12:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - the nominator has summed it up right. JohnCD (talk) 14:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete and allow editors to re-create articles with sources per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:25, 23 March 2008 (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.