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. ✗plicit 00:10, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nickie Lum Shapira[edit]

Nickie Lum Shapira (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)

This article was created on 1 November 2011. Within two minutes of being created, User:OlYeller21 nominated it for speedy deletion under WP:G11. User:Kudpung reviewed this nomination and declined it the next day, saying that it "makes claims to notability" (being, perhaps, a little confused between A7 and G11). Kudpung then proposed it for deletion under BLPPROD. Two days later, User:The-Pope added sources:- this one (which appears to be a wordpress blog which accepts user-submitted content), and one that no longer exists but appears not to be independent. The-Pope then tagged it as requiring various kinds of improvement and "possibly" not being notable. Then nobody did anything substantive for ten years. I put it to the community that this article has never met our inclusion criteria. —S Marshall T/C 17:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. —S Marshall T/C 17:41, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:04, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per nom, found nothing talking about this person. Jumpytoo Talk 01:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. She's now apparently Nickie Lum Davis, under which name she's received a fair amount of press coverage (e.g. [1]) related to her guilty plea on charges of illicit foreign lobbying. That coverage is still fairly minimal, and I think both WP:NOTNEWS and BLP sensitivities counsel against retaining such an article based solely on her legal woes. Since my search for coverage pertaining to her business career was unavailing, deletion is in my view the best choice. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:47, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:BLP1E. The subject has received significant coverage in reliable sources for "Consultant charged in covert lobbying of Trump officials". WP:BLP1E says:

  Wikipedia is not news, or an indiscriminate collection of information. Being in the news does not in itself mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article. We generally should avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:

  1. If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.
  2. If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article.
  3. If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant and his role was both substantial and well documented.

  Reliable sources cover her only in the context of this event, she is and remains a low-profile individual (Rachel Maddow said, "Nickie is Nickie Lum Davis, who is not a famous person. There's no reason you would have heard her name in the news."), and the event is not significant.

  Cunard (talk) 11:18, 5 March 2022 (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.