Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daria Onyschenko (2nd nomination)

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. Tone 17:43, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Daria Onyschenko

[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)

Article about a subjects that fails WP:N and WP:FILMMAKER. Claim of award with no sources to back up. Sources provided do not meet WP:RS standard. Lapablo (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lapablo (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Lapablo (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Lapablo (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. Lapablo (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 13:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The previous deletion discussion was closed as "no consensus" less than two months ago. Does the nominator have a new argument to present? pburka (talk) 17:32, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Procedural keep. WP:DPAFD requires that editors allow a reasonable amount of time before renominating. The nominator has not explained why we should revisit the discussion that was just completed in August. pburka (talk) 23:52, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete How this wasn’t deleted in the first place was an editorial failure. This is source-less and there are no reliable sources out there. It’s also promotional. Trillfendi (talk) 13:45, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It has been 8 weeks since the Afd and don't see any progress. No effective references. scope_creep^Talk 17:34, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a central princible of Wikipedia is verrifiability which means we need to have the sources in the article not vague claims they may exist somewhere.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:51, 2 October 2020 (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.