Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lacey Banghard


 * 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. joe deckertalk to me 05:13, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Lacey Banghard

 * – ( View AfD View log )

non notable person Wuh  Wuz  Dat  19:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep- after going blind from seeing the subject's photo, this confirmed bachelor confirmed that she was the winner of the 2010 contest by The Sun as its Page Three model of the year. That's enough for notability of a model. Bearian (talk) 02:07, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep I am not a "bachelor", and am very sorry about Bearian's sudden onset of vision problems. Also, I don't "read" the third page of British tabloid newspapers, but this model's award winning ways as documented in this article convince me that she is notable. Cullen328 (talk) 03:54, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. References check out. However, there is basically only one publication writing about her -- The Sun, and there is every indication that this is soft pornography, that is, Wikipedia in essence is (unfortunately) by printing this article, is getting into the soft porn business. The attention to this person is basically because the woman is beautiful with a push-the-envelope name. So, according to Wikipedia's rules, we probably have to keep her in, but let's keep this article short and to the point.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:17, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Subject does not meet our basic notability criterion for people: "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." In this case, even if we consider the sources as secondary, they are not intellectually independent of each other. People can also be notable for "a well-known and significant award", or for having made "a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field", but I don't see how this applies here either. --Lambiam 14:00, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Completely made up facts about this AFD: Since WWD's nominations of Category:Page Three girls, Keep votes have gone up .00000000004%, WWD's nominations that have been Kept have gone up .00000005%, and postdlf closes as Keep have gone up .0003% Anarchangel (talk) 16:36, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * What?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:06, 12 April 2011 (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.