Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Discrimination: Difference between revisions

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Discrimination. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace “PageName” with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Discrimination|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Discrimination. For the other XfD’s, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia’s deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Ava Cordero (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

WP:AVOIDVICTIM: At present, this article is primarily focused on the fact that Cordero was a victim of Jeffrey Epstein. This is compounded by her public outing. Overall, I don’t know that her work as a model meets NBIO. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:13, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Crime, LGBTQ+ studies, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 02:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I agree, it seems her only notability comes from her association with Epstein. The rest of the news is also very negative, I think WP:AVOIDVICTIM is accurate. Ajheindel (talk) 02:58, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – I agree with the nominator. The subject’s coverage in reliable sources is primarily tied to her role as a victim in a single event, which invokes WP:AVOIDVICTIM. Furthermore, her career as a model does not appear to meet the significant, independent, and sustained coverage required by WP:NBIO or WP:GNG. Bocanegris (talk) 08:25, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I agree, article has promise, but needs loads of work and WP:AVOIDVICTIM (for now, atleast).

BronMeat _talk 10:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Could it not then be improved instead of deleted? — Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 04:02, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Rosaece ♡ talk ♡ contribs 13:58, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Or to move to draft in case more sources come to light that help make the article more than about her role as a victim. — Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:32, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Willthacheerleader18: Please remember that sources will need to portray Cordero’s notability beyond being connected to a criminal as a victim. Can you find sources that discuss Cordero in depth without mentioning Epstein at all? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:23, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That same standard does not seem to apply with the sources used for the articles on Virginia Giuffre and Maria Farmer (i.e. “without mentioning Epstein at all”).. — Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 03:58, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To me WP:AVOIDVICTIM is somewhat vague, it is not that we cannot create articles for people who are victims, but they need to have some notability with the case as well to justify things. For Giuffre and Farmer, they both were instrumental in leading to criminal charges being filed, and they have both been advocates following. For Cordero, it appeared to be an isolated incident and she brought a lawsuit that didn’t lead anywhere, based on this article it appears she has not been involved with further events related to Epstein. Also having her criminal convictions included makes it worse as well, she only has an article because she is an Epstein victim, and yet a decent portion of the article is about the tabloid campaign and issues with the law, all of which is very negative against her. Maybe other editors will disagree with that assessment though. Ajheindel (talk) 04:44, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:35, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment there are these additional sources from New York Magazine as well that have not been added to the article: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], and [11] — Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 22:44, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment additional sources from Above the Law that have not been added to the article: [12] and [13] — Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment additional sources not used in the article, from Lucy From Naarm ([14]) and The Forward ([15]) — Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 22:49, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment additional source not used in the article from Dealbreaker ([16]) — Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 22:52, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment additional sources not used in the article from The Huffington Post ([17]), The National Review ([18]), LGBTQ Nation ([19]), and The Smoking Gun ([20]) — Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 22:55, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 04:50, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The following articles have been tagged for proposed deletion: