Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sassa Gurl (3rd nomination)
Appearance
- 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 keep. ✗plicit 13:22, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sassa Gurl (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)
References are lots and lots of clickbait, non-bylined PR articles, social media driven sites and other PR. Fails WP:SIGCOV. Potentially notable. scope_creepTalk 09:07, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, and Philippines. Shellwood (talk) 11:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry to disagree, but you're just being biased by saying that the article is clickbait. Did you check the references? I think you didn’t, because as you can see, all the sources cited are based on facts, and their content supports the statements in the article. Besides, those references come from reputable news media outlets, specifically in the Philippines, and you can search and verify them yourself. 🌼𝓡𝓬 𝓡𝓪𝓶𝔃🍁 (talk) 12:03, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Rc ramz: Where did I say the article is clickbait? I never said the article is clickbait. If you mention it again I'm going to have you up WP:ANI for barefaced lying. The references are clickbait. I checked the first block and about 6 in the second block. They are all PR. scope_creepTalk 12:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- reference rather... 🌼𝓡𝓬 𝓡𝓪𝓶𝔃🍁 (talk) 12:42, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Rc ramz: Where did I say the article is clickbait? I never said the article is clickbait. If you mention it again I'm going to have you up WP:ANI for barefaced lying. The references are clickbait. I checked the first block and about 6 in the second block. They are all PR. scope_creepTalk 12:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: there seems to be enough coverage about her, including https://preen.ph/131124/sassa-gurl-will-not-let-you-define-her ; https://republicasiamedia.com/whats-happening/sassa-gurl-dazzles-with-new-single-maria-hiwaga/ https://entertainment.inquirer.net/534754/eugene-domingo-believes-in-sassa-gurls-potential-to-be-the-next-kimmy-dora and so on; https://tribune.net.ph/2023/11/06/smokey-manaloto-eugene-domingo-sassa-gurl-headline-takeshis-castle-reboot, https://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2024/07/12/2369452/working-fantasy-icon-marian-rivera-dream-come-true-sassa-gurl https://pop.inquirer.net/355283/on-misdirected-hate-and-missing-the-point-the-discourse-on-sassa-gurl-and-loonies-feud etc, it sometimes includes interviews, but it certainly indicates some notability, I would say. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Keep: Out of over 30 references in the article, less than half are either probably clickbait articles and/or are dribble from PR or social media driven sites. Such issues can be fixed by adding or changing relevant details to references (adding direct quotations, author fields if any and so on). Some references will eventually be changed (https://www.philstar.com/tags/sassa-gurl can be changed to a particular article in the PhilStar website like https://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2022/05/05/2178259/sassa-gurl-reacts-bashing-white-castle-calendar-girl for example) or dropped altogether. As for significant coverage, I'd say that Sassa Gurl has received some coverage in mainstream outlets while in terms of notability, I'd put article's subject in the same tier or class as Mimiyuuuh. -Ian Lopez @ 18:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Has significant coverage. -Object404 (talk) 20:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:52, 28 September 2024 (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.