Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mymelody-Molly Jones

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mymelody-Molly Jones

Mymelody-Molly Jones (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

No sources, there are zero Google hits for Mymelody Molly Jones and only two for Peeraporn Thapviwat, neither of them a reliable source. I freely admit that the transliteration from Thai to Latin characters may make this difficult to search for, but if she's now living in the United States and is a well-known Elvis impersonator, I would expect to find some evidence of it in English. She isn't listed on imdb as an actor for the Point of No Return episode of "That's So Raven" - http://imdb.com/title/tt0720491/ "Thai Achiever" magazine, which is used for references, has no web presence. That's not necessarily a problem, except that if this magazine does exist, the references just to the name of a magazine do no good, they require issue numbers. Corvus cornixtalk 03:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jonny-mt 16:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. Not sure what to make of this. It doesn't feel like a hoax, but there's virtually nothing on Google. Google translate won't work for this either. I'll try to look at it bit more tonight when I have more time. Xymmax (talk) 21:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete without prejudice to recreation if verifiable sources can be located. To quote WP:V, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". I imagine it goes without saying that if verifiable sources are located now, I would prefer not to delete, but in case it doesn't.... :) It seems unlikely, given how long this article has been tagged. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:59, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, as I could find absolutely nothing while searching that would demonstrate the barest hint of existence of the subject, which is just bizarre. —αlεx•mullεr 20:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete without prejudice, per Moonriddengirl. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:33, 28 February 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.