Deletion of Kay Rush

Comment: after nearly two weeks at AFD, the side advocating keep still have not satisfied - and I can't find any substantial coverage either
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:BURDEN)

Comment: To be fair, for the first week the notice was somewhat lost. Even so those concerned with editing the article only seem to have switched a gear yesterday by asking (above) what to do. Yet the Italian and Spanish articles also suffer fromthe same problem. As someone commented above, I, too, do not read these languages, but I was not satisfied that the media I could find in them were themselves {{WP:RS compliant, so reading the text was hardly relevant. And there is Google Translate. We also know that anyone can wrte a book and that you acquire an ISBN as a matter of course whether your book is vanity published or mainstream published.  was quoted above, an amusing essay, but just that, an essay.  was quoted, something which looks like a last ditch attempt to save the unsavabale. "Look, we can't actually find any references for this, but let's keep it anyway, we have shedloads of room" is not a valid argument. Itls like taking in all the stray mongrel puppies you can find and pretending they are pedigree dogs and entering them for Crufts. When Ms Rush becomes notable and verifiable, then the article on her has a place here. However I can find, so far, nothing to suggest that she passes our criteria. And her references to "''my'' article" reinforce my belief that this is a publicity exercise, an advert
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:There is no deadline (WP:TIND||WP:PAPER)