Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Swissa

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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:50, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Ruth Swissa

Ruth Swissa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

She has a practice, has had some coverage in the media and belongs to some seemingly non-notable professional organisations. I couldn't establish that she meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 14:42, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 15:31, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 15:31, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:20, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:40, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

• Very weak delete - appears to be a go-to expert in Los Angeles news media on cosmetic and cosmetic treatment to cover up damage from surgery and cancer, e.g. here, here, here, here, which is a legitimate medical topic. But I don't see that this makes her notable in herself. If I saw senior membership or leadership position in some professional association establishing that she's notable in herself not just because her clinic is handy for TV crews to go to I'd vote keep, but I don't. Blythwood (talk) 05:21, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 18:46, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

• Delete - the two news appearances were not stories about her, so it was not significant coverage per WP:GNG. Other sources are not reliable - ex: CTW (Connection to Wellbeing) is just a local advertising sheet that profiles its advertisers. She does not meet WP:ANYBIO as she does not seem to have any achievement, contribution or award different than anyone else in her field. Netrogeractor (talk) 02:02, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

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.