Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kylie Bisutti


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 (talk) 21:23, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Kylie Bisutti

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Now this is what I’m talking about in the “But she was in the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show!” camp—and this is an extreme example. This is just ridiculous. You mean to tell me, the year Adriana Lima was pregnant they decided to do a model search to replace her for that show; this girl gets the spot, what any model in the world would consider the Golden Ticket to launch a modeling career from, then promptly retires from lingerie modeling because it conflicts with her religious beliefs. She has not done one modeling job to speak of yet writes a memoir about that one-off Victoria’s Secret stint and retiring to Montana. Instead of modeling she used that to milk some money out of this publicity stunt. It goes without saying that is no WP:NMODEL. Delete this. (Side note:Daily Mail and Fox News are not reliable sources) Trillfendi (talk) 17:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. This nomination seems like WP:IDONTLIKEIT. However, the subject easily passes WP:GNG - there is plenty of significant coverage in reliable soruces (as well as unreliable ones). StAnselm (talk) 19:57, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * As User:StAnselm], states, Nom, who writes many articles on fashion models, appears to have substituted a personal opinion, [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT, for a WP:BEFORE search. Had Nom looked, he might have noticed that massive media coverage of Bisutti and the book she wrote.   In addition, the question of whether Bisutti passes WP:MODEL is irrelevant because she passes WP:SIGCOV and WP:AUTHOR.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:10, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment it’s not that “I don’t like it”, it just doesn’t make sense to me that a “model” who did one job then retired then wrote a book to milk the situation even after Victoria’s Secret said she never had a contract with them even has an article. It’s simply an WP:NMODEL case. And it’s not like we can rewrite it for her to be notable as WP:NAUTHOR because from what I could find she certainly doesn’t meet that criteria (and it wasn’t even a bestseller). This article is promotional at most.Trillfendi (talk) 20:08, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment Also on top that she says “I’m no Angel” (a slogan other models and brands have also said when VS shuts them out) which furthers proves my point about this. Being an Angel is notability without question; not being an Angel isn’t notability in this case. The Angels that year were Adriana, Marisa Miller, Behati Prinsloo, Karolina Kurkova, Miranda Kerr, Heidi Klum, and Alessandra Ambrosio — all Kylie Bisutti did was participate in a contest (which wouldn’t even have happened had Adriana Lima not been on maternity leave). If this was Ford Supermodel of the World or Elite Model Look I wouldn’t have proposed this.Trillfendi (talk) 20:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable model.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:32, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per massive amount of coverage of Bisutti and her book major publications,  major TV network interviews.  Passes WP:AUTHOR.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:03, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Writing one memoir about a publicity stunt then not writing ever again makes one a WP:AUTHOR now?Trillfendi (talk) 00:06, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * She passes WP:GNG because of what comes up when you click "News" on searchbar at top of this page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * E.M.Gregory She meets this criteria?: "1. The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors. 2. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique. 3. The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. 4. The person's work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museum." Miley Cyrus wrote a memoir at 16 that got even more coverage (Los Angeles Times, Hollywood Reporter, Billboard, Sydney Morning Herald etc.) is she a WP:AUTHOR? Kendall and Kylie Jenner wrote a novel... are they classidied as authors? I just can’t see the rationale.Trillfendi (talk) 00:17, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFF.
 * Nom, one book can be enough to pass WP:AUTHOR#3 "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." But it is not the book alone tha tmakes her notable, it is the many news, feature, profile articles and book reviews in major media  over the years that carry her past WP:GNG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:42, 12 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. She has authored a second book and as been mentioned previously has appeared in various RS magazines and shows. I'd argue that part of her notability is the fact that she turned away from a potentially successful long-term modeling career for her faith, a curiosity that helped fuel the articles and interviews. I'll volunteer to help clean up the sourcing if the article survives the AfD. LovelyLillith (talk) 21:14, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * User:LovelyLillith, It will almost certainly survive AfD, Nom has offered no policy based reason for deletion and the available sourcing is extremely strong. Proper sourcing and other improvements may persuade Nom to change his opinion. But even it it does not, a good article is a always a good thing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:05, 12 November 2018 (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.