Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sara Racey-Tabrizi


 * 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 delete - strong consensus, and 1 keep sock. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Sara Racey-Tabrizi


Losing contestant on a reality television show. Prod was removed by User:Badlydrawnjeff with the comment that reality television contestants are "inherently notable". This contestant hasn't done anything notable before or since the show, and didn't win on the show. She's just another struggling model. About 600 hits on Google. . Mikeblas 18:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * DELETE Even though W is not paper, I can't see an article on every struggling model who was a !reality game show contestant. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  18:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all failed contestants for game shows unless they've really established themselves elsewhere. wikipediatrix 21:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails to assert ant notability. scope_creep 23:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Wishy washy Delete. One can be initially impressed by the glossies she has apparently been in, but she scores only 165 unique Ghits, the vast majority from wiki mirrors, blogs and some from reality-show fansites, and the odd link to hotbabes.com type sites. Don't quite know how it works but no name recognition at Maximonline and iVillage (Cosmo). However, I'm wavering now that I've seen her article on King magazine Tara was right, though, she's not anorexic enough to be a top catwalk model ;-) Ohconfucius 02:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * KEEP A google search for "Sara Racey" brings back more than 36,000 results, not "about 600" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.14.13.79 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment counting GHits is not research per User:Uncle G. It's the quality of the links which is important. Ohconfucius 10:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment "Sara Racey-Tabrizi" only garners 600 for me. and "Sara Racey" 900 of which 235 are unique Sara Racey without brackets gets 36000. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  15:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, well-known reality contestant. Meets WP:BIO easily. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment With all due respect, Jeff, please show me how and where. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  16:02, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * What part are you questioning? She was on seven episodes of a very popular reality show seen by millions, America's Next Top Model.  She's certainly well known.  Because of that, she meets WP:BIO, which allows for the inclusion of "television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions." --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually - and I know you know this - you're selectively choosing portions to deceptively suit your argument. What WP:BIO specifically says is: "Notable actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions" and then goes on to spell out what constitutes "notable". She fails. Big time. Next time you quote policy, try not to leave out the part of the sentence that doesn't agree with you! wikipediatrix 16:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's quite the accusation, and I request you retract it. Why don't we spell it out, since you think I'm being sly:  "Multiple features in pop-culture magazines?"  No problem, what entertainment magaizne hasn't covered the people in this show.  "Large fan base, cult following."  Do a Google search on NTM sometime.  "Independent biography."  Might not meet this, although I'm sure the NTM site has one.  "Name recognition."  without a doubt.  People know who are on reality shows.  "Commercial endorsements."  Borderline.  It ain't L'Aureal, but she's done plenty of magazine work which could fit in here.  There's no need to attack me just because you disagree, I deserve better. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You left out the crucial part of the sentence that contradicted your own point. Why would you do that? I have no idea. Feel free to explain. wikipediatrix 16:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, no, I didn't. Mainly because it didn't contradict anything.  She easily meets the standard. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that just does not satisfy WP:BIO. Here today, gone tomorrow-- and that just does not make her encyclopedic. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  16:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails wp BIO - not a notable tv personality JBKramer 18:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. If the subject of this article was suffuciently notable, we would have reputable, reliable third-party sources from which to write an article.  Does not meet the requirements of WP:BIO or WP:V. -- Satori Son 20:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete nn--MONGO 21:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete inherently non-notable.  --Tbeatty 05:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WMMartin 18:55, 20 November 2006 (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.