Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alis Rowe
A breakdown of the recent changes. Seven of the fifteen sources cited are primary, which are the BBC Radio and Surrey Hills Community Radio interviews (interviews are primary sources), the National Autistic Society profile (she wrote the profile herself and is connected to this group), the Your Autism Magazine article (she wrote it and the magazine is distributed by the National Autistic Society, with which she is connected), the Healthy Magazine article (a brief article that she wrote), AuKids (she is connected with it, which is all the cited page says), and the Curly Hair Project is her own website. Secondary sources have to be independent of the subject, therefore these are all primary sources. The Getreading article, the Richmond article, and the UnLtd. page all have only one sentence about her, therefore they are all obvious examples of . The Huffington Post article isn't about her and mentions her only briefly. This is not significant coverage. The Bath Echo article and the Richmond & Twickenham Times article are both from local papers, and generally more weight is given to national media outlets in establishing notability. A one-page Marie Claire article is cited, but it is not available online so its contents are unknown. The lase source, Able magazine, appears to be an example of  as the article cited is very promotional, the magazine does not come from a reputable established publisher, and it does not have a reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. Even after these changes this article still fails  because it does not have enough '''significant''' coverage in '''reliable secondary''' sources, and still relies too heavily on primary sources (seven out of fifteen, nearly half) and trivial coverage
— User:SThompson, 22:57, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:TRIVIAL||WP:QUESTIONABLE||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)