Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tara Babcock


 * 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. Scott Mac (Doc) 19:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Tara Babcock

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails WP:ENT. Assertion of notability as glamour/expo model is stretched, as her credits are all rather insignificant and vague and the vast majority of claims (many weasel-ish) are sourced to self-published websites while G-news returns results on a student of the same name instead. Any model whose most noteworthy claims include Twitter fans, appearing on websites like CoEd Magazine and ManHelper, and supposedly being known as "Queen of the Underboob" probably doesn't warrant an article.  Mbinebri  talk &larr; 18:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:07, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

Tara Babcock is a very well known glamour model who has been included in well known iPhone Apps, known magazines (American Curves, MuscleMag, etc) commonly found in popular book stores and gas stations internationally. Also, well known TV programs have featured her as well (Men's choice awards, G4, etc). She has created her brand name without signing exclusive contracts and is much more notable than some models who have had verified Wikipedia pages (Teresa Noreen, etc) Nowhere does it state anything about her main achievements being "Twitter" fans. If the model in question, though, created her initial fame based upon social networking sites this is a notable fact that must be reported. Upon searching Tara Babcock in any search engine you will find dozens of pages of images, articles and links that replicate or exceed other notable models. This argument sounds more like an attack filled with personal opinion rather than fact as you are conveniently forgetting to mention all of the most notable achievements on the article and twisting the words so that they fit your ideas. Although I have not been able to find citable proof, I have also seen Tara Babcock in many other television shows hosting and in a few other magazine articles. I have heard of her repeatedly without looking for her or other models. In my professional opinion as a writer and consumer of media, there is no doubt of the notability of this Wikipedia article. Thank you. Infoleader (talk) 10:26, 27, January 2010 (UTC) — Infoleader (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete of course, she has numerous google hits for her image. however, i cannot find any text documents asserting her notability. COED magazine isnt notable either. if she becomes notable purely for her internet presence, surely there will be coverage in RS. I would support, of course, adding her name to a list of models, and in recreating her article once notability is established. Infoleader, please assume good faith. WP guidelines require notability beyond simply endless mirroring on the internet (though as i said, if its extremely voluminous, which is very hard to measure, that may qualify her at some point)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:57, 31 January 2010 (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.