Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lilly Contino (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 speedy delete as A7, no credible claim of significance. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:22, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lilly Contino

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Subject is not notable + Subject is very controversial within the LGBTQ community + Article is kind of outdated, barely any effort to expand it + Not enough followers to be considered notable? + Subject basically gets bullied on every post they make so the article isn't really helping Spritor (talk) 00:06, 10 November 2025 (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/2025 November 10. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:19, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Subject is known for several events that kicked up a lot of controvery (the restaurant streams, disney selfies, etc) but these events have not been covered by sources that are deemed reliable enough for inclusion in a WP:BLP. Since an article about Contino can't really include the events that people know about her for, I feel this article is rendered somewhat pointless besides being an occasional magnet for disruption from people that harbor a grudge towards the subject.

Also a general reminder to avoid WP:BLUDGEONing or using LLMs in the discussion considering how the first nomination went.^LaffyTaffer 💬(she/they) 00:52, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Food and drink, Video games, Internet, California, and Minnesota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:58, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:59, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Bridget (talk) 01:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to the paucity of reliable sources, that aren't good enough for a BLP. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 07:38, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete completely fails WP:SIGCOV as the sources noted are few and highly suspect at best. No true assertion to notability which is a speedy criteria (A7). ~2025-32189-73 (talk) 10:21, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The article does not meet the notability and no verification of citations.

Dinitrify (talk) 11:48, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of LGBTQ+ studies-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:51, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No evidence of WP:SIGCOV in turn, failing WP:GNG. Demt1298 (talk) 12:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: See the sources I listed in my last AfD comment, still a keep for me. Oaktree b (talk) 16:20, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG. Not many reliable sources. Kind of similar to Chris Chan where almost all coverage is negative, and she receives a lot of trolls. jolielover♥talk 17:37, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Let’s just close as a delete since the outcome is definitely going to be delete. The only keep is from a fan of Contino @Oaktree b Spritor (talk) 21:11, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't cast aspersions, the sources are there for all to read. Oaktree b (talk) 21:26, 10 November 2025 (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.