235:,An actress who has appeared in various TV shows, a film and independent films too. She's appeared in two reality TV shows, both of which she got far in. She is a signed solo singer now too, this should not be deleted at all! There's so much worse articles in terms of people not being well known but this person has appeared in big productions and a big amount of things to warrant an article. It just needs some more sources.
369:, I spent some time editing her page and I have looked into her background as both a singer/actress, she has not just appeared as an extra in productions infact she has appeared as a featured guest star and in lead roles. She has released a music video for her first single and appeared in two big reality TV shows. It's quite evident that shes well known enough to have this wikipedia article.
191:
My bad, I'll strike that first part. Sourcing is the biggest thing here - pretty much anyone who competes in a reality show gets some sort of press these days, much of which is probably available online. If that can be added to the article, I'm all for it. She did appear regularly in two
352:
independent of the subject, to any robust degree. Indeed, articles have been kept for less in the past; overall, however: I'd agree with the nomination statement–a non-notable subject, going on provided sources, at least.
315:
289:
122:
129:
Disputed prod. Doesn't have strong notability claims, serial nn reality TV contestant, nn model, nn singer. Happy to be persuaded otherwise.
177:
argument? I agree with you it needs RS, but what do you think is the notability claim on which the article should be kept (if sourced)? --
242:
17:
89:
84:
256:
Appearing as an extra does not bring notability, nor does losing in reality TV shows, unless it brings unusual notoriety etc, like
93:
76:
385:
265:
174:
36:
384:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
246:
345:
238:
361:
330:
304:
277:
268:
argument, which merely argues that other articles should be deleted too. Feel free to list them at AfD. --
250:
227:
201:
186:
164:
138:
58:
326:
300:
197:
160:
261:
224:
80:
216:
273:
182:
134:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
349:
322:
296:
193:
192:
nationally-televised programs on top-tier networks; that's not nothing by most standards.
156:
49:
341:
220:
72:
64:
269:
178:
130:
110:
260:. Signed solo singer is also not notable until a notable release is made, per
257:
219:, and non-winners of reality shows are not considered inherently notable. --
354:
378:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
316:
list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions
149:
Articles have been kept for less notoriety than that, but
290:
list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions
117:
106:
102:
98:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
388:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
151:the article could really use some sources...
348:: notability hasn't been established with
314:: This debate has been included in the
288:: This debate has been included in the
336:I'm going to jump in here and offer a
344:is a (admittedly, narrow) failure of
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
340:argument. I'd say that the subject
24:
1:
215:, no appearance of meeting
405:
346:Knowledge (XXG):Notability
381:Please do not modify it.
362:00:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
331:00:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
305:00:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
278:11:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
251:18:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
228:14:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
202:10:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
187:10:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
165:10:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
139:09:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
59:23:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
264:. And you end with a
155:sources, actually.
266:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS
175:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS
44:The result was
333:
319:
307:
293:
253:
241:comment added by
396:
383:
359:
350:reliable sources
320:
310:
294:
284:
236:
120:
114:
96:
56:
34:
404:
403:
399:
398:
397:
395:
394:
393:
392:
386:deletion review
379:
355:
116:
87:
71:
68:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
402:
400:
391:
390:
373:
371:
370:
364:
334:
308:
282:
281:
280:
230:
209:
208:
207:
206:
205:
204:
168:
167:
127:
126:
67:
62:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
401:
389:
387:
382:
376:
375:
374:
368:
365:
363:
360:
358:
351:
347:
343:
342:Melissa Smith
339:
335:
332:
328:
324:
317:
313:
309:
306:
302:
298:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
254:
252:
248:
244:
243:78.147.143.21
240:
234:
231:
229:
226:
222:
218:
214:
211:
210:
203:
199:
195:
190:
189:
188:
184:
180:
176:
172:
171:
170:
169:
166:
162:
158:
154:
150:
146:
143:
142:
141:
140:
136:
132:
124:
119:
112:
108:
104:
100:
95:
91:
86:
82:
78:
74:
73:Melissa Smith
70:
69:
66:
65:Melissa Smith
63:
61:
60:
57:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
380:
377:
372:
366:
356:
337:
311:
285:
232:
212:
152:
148:
144:
128:
52:
51:
45:
43:
31:
28:
323:Fabrictramp
297:Fabrictramp
237:—Preceding
173:Is that an
262:WP:CRYSTAL
258:Nasty Nick
194:Duncan1800
157:Duncan1800
145:Weak keep
53:Wizardman
239:unsigned
221:Dhartung
217:WP:MUSIC
123:View log
357:Anthøny
270:Dweller
179:Dweller
131:Dweller
90:protect
85:history
338:delete
213:Delete
118:delete
94:delete
46:delete
121:) – (
111:views
103:watch
99:links
16:<
367:Keep
327:talk
312:Note
301:talk
286:Note
274:talk
247:talk
233:Keep
225:Talk
198:talk
183:talk
161:talk
135:talk
107:logs
81:talk
77:edit
321:--
318:.
295:--
292:.
153:any
329:)
303:)
276:)
249:)
223:|
200:)
185:)
163:)
147:.
137:)
109:|
105:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
83:|
79:|
48:.
325:(
299:(
272:(
245:(
196:(
181:(
159:(
133:(
125:)
115:(
113:)
75:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.