Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cate Dunk

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. Clear consensus for deletion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:36, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cate Dunk

Cate Dunk (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)

Unnotable model who doesn't satisfy WP:GNG or WP:BIO. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:39, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Unable to find any mention of this person in RS. One of the first 10 results is a 9gag post which has misspelled "cat". Hrodvarsson (talk) 23:11, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:18, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:18, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I clicked through the references and they were either self-published, trivial mentions, or didn't actually say anything about Cate Dunk. I conducted my own search and couldn't find any discussion about this person. Unless someone can demonstrate at least a few reliable secondary sources, I vote delete. Lonehexagon (talk) 00:09, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete total failure of the GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:03, 31 March 2018 (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.