Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luvensky Valmont

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 Speedy deleted as a CSD G7, by editor's request.. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Luvensky Valmont

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

GNG fail. --- Possibly (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this was already deleted also once as a promotional userspace draft.--- Possibly (talk) 16:58, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Haiti-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails GNG. Nothing notable on searches... No r sources provided in the article. Not enough for a BLP. Kolma8 (talk) 14:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no point in draftifying, there are no references that demonstrate any notability. This would not have been accepted at AFC (0.95 probabiity). Fails WP:BIO, WP:NARTIST Likely WP:TOOSOON Fiddle Faddle 16:47, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - searches did not turn up enough to show they pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:05, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not enough coverage to pass WP:GNG. DmitriRomanovJr (talk) 17:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I tried removing all unsourced content and found that nothing was left. Vexations (talk) 22:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the creator says they will "wait until we have more verifiable references " before creating the article (or something like that), so I'll try to speedy delete this.--- Possibly (talk) 00:54, 28 March 2021 (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.