Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katie Hopkins (2nd nomination)


 * 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   speedy keep. There are plenty of reliable sources. Obviously notable. There's absolutely no point dragging this argument out for a week. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:26, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Katie Hopkins

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Delete - Violates WP:GA, WP:CITE, and WP:NOTE. Most citations are tabloid articles that do not provide any certifiable notability outside of sensationalism.  Most citations are either repeats or are just poorly written. 2dFx (talk) 22:56, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Much as I would like to remove this woman from the planet, never mind Wikipedia, I cannot but recognise the fact that she is a fairly regular and high-profile commentator on several national television programmes. I am no expert on bio notability guidelines here on wiki, I'd be the first to admit, but I would've thought that this in itself is sufficient. She has also had a presence in politics if that article's sources are anything to go by. The article may need a re-word but outside of that, this article should stay. Pigduck (talk) 00:03, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep – as there are 389 ghits on the bbc site alone, ranging from 2007 to 2013, her notability seems beyond question. Oculi (talk) 00:14, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.67.107.230 (talk • contribs)
 * Speedy keep The large number of refs immediately show widespread presence. Yes, most of them are from tabloids but that's just a reflection of her tabloid-type, populist persona.--A bit iffy (talk) 04:51, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge with The Apprentice. Crookesmoor (talk) 12:22, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - as per Pigduck Atlas-maker (talk) 12:46, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I came across the article as I was looking for some background on her as she's had significant news coverage today (Google News ). Given this, I think she is notable enough to merit an article.   d avid p rior  t/c 14:56, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * 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.