Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linda Pinizzotto (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 redirect to COA Ontario. - After being up for 3 weeks there's not been much of a discussion and those that have !voted have gone with redirecting, Don't really see any point in relisting either. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 00:59, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Pinizzotto

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

I have carefully tried to verify each source cited in the article, have performed significant cleanup, and looked for additional sources. At this point, I feel compelled to nominate this article for deletion (as has been done already).

Wikipedia:Notability (people) states that notability is supported if the person has "received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources which are reliable", and there is "depth of coverage". In source after source, Pinizzotto , a successful real-estate salesperson from Toronto, appears to offer one or two-sentence comments about condominium-related issues to local media (see here and here). There is no depth of coverage, and no indication this person "has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field".

As well, Pinizzotto's notability appears to rely on her relationship with the Condo Owners Association in the Province of Ontario. In the same two reliable sources listed above (here and here), Pinizzotto's association with that organization are mentioned. Thus, a merging of the Pinizzotto article may be appropriate.

Finally, Pinizzotto's notability is enhanced in the article by her "radio show", and the article has been added to the category "Canadian radio personalities". This claim does not appear to pass Wikipedia:Verifiability. The "radio station" Pinizzotto is purported to be associated with, as reported here, is an online media supplier called "thehazefm.ca", owned by Whiterock Media. It does not appear to be a radio station.

Because the creator of this article, User talk:Formula2013, seems focused on articles dealing with Pinizzotto and her two sons, Jason Pinizzotto and Steve Pinizzotto, it begs the question about whether this article is an autobiography, which is strongly discouraged, or a conflict of interest, which this editor was cautioned about here. Pinizzotto has also placed free audio clips on Apple iTunes here, along with the message "you can learn more about Linda on Wikipedia". Magnolia677 (talk) 15:05, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 15:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 15:24, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to COA Ontario. There are no significant references about her. The ones that mention her are in the context of this association. Saying that she has notability would be like saying that every spokesperson for a notable company is notable. T.C.Haliburton^{talk nerdy to me} 15:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:06, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:06, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:07, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:07, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirection to COA Ontario might be acceptable, but even that article is a primary sourced mess with overtones of advertising, which is itself a potential deletion candidate — so I'd actually prefer to just delete. But failing a consensus for that, count me toward redirect as well, because no matter what happens this isn't properly sourced enough to stand as an independent WP:BLP. Bearcat (talk) 18:15, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:10, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:50, 16 January 2015 (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.