Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anima Xavier

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. slakr^\ talk / 06:32, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anima Xavier

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

Non notable person, WP:COI WP:AUTOBIO. Seems to be a cotsume-con personality, no coverage in reliable sources, just con blogs. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 March 11. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 20:40, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:56, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:GNG. The article has no reliable sources and I could not find any elsewhere, neither under "Anima Xavier" nor under "Animal X". (But there are lots of hits for the second phrase with other meanings, e.g. as part of the phrase "animal X-rays", so I could easily have missed something relevant.) —David Eppstein (talk) 22:58, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability not proven. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:40, 19 March 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Weak delete - weak sourcing; chairing CostumeCon is not that notable. Bearian (talk) 16:34, 20 March 2014 (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.