Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Murphy (hairdresser)

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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 12:24, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Murphy (hairdresser)

[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)

Fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO and WP:ORG. Primary purpose seems to be to promote the article subject and his company. Reads like a resume. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 15:05, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Fashion, and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:03, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Independent coverage by Vogue and Cosmopolitan tip the balance into notable territory for me. Owen× ☎ 19:39, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete there's also this [1], where it looks like the photo was "borrowed" but it's an interview, so not helpful. I don't see enough coverage to keep the article.Oaktree b (talk) 23:36, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete or draftify per WP:ATD-I. The current page feels extremely promotional, and I agree that image is surely WP:COPYVIO. But to give the article the possibility of meeting GNG with a significant rewrite, consider moving it to draft space instead of deletion, given there is some weight in the Vogue and Cosmopolitan articles? Cabrils (talk) 00:39, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per WP:NOTADVERTISING and other arguments above. TarnishedPath^talk 12:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as the Delete opinions are Weak. There is also an ATD mentioned with a possible draftification.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:39, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify or delete. The sourcing is weak for a BLP but he has clearly worked at the top of his profession for many years and gotten recognition for that. The question is whether there are enough sources about his life/career (and not his styling tips) to write an article and I am not really seeing that from the sources in the article or linked above. Eluchil404 (talk) 06:19, 10 December 2023 (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.