Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tara Smith (hair stylist)


 * 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   no consensus. Courcelles 00:04, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Tara Smith (hair stylist)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Can't find significant coverage about the subject in RSs sufficient to meet WP:BIO/WP:GNG and no indication subject meets any other variant of WP:N. Novaseminary (talk) 00:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * no opinion but here are some sources for someone who cares: the sun, marie claire, vanity fair, the sunday times, vogue (not dead link like one in article). &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 02:06, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 02:07, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 02:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 02:10, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment The sources above don't seem to be substantial enough in depth of coverage to establish notability. The sources in and of themselves are fine, just not sufficient in my opinion. Novaseminary (talk) 17:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Lacks sufficient WP:RS to satisfy WP:GNG … the only awards that the subject has won are not notable enough to rate Wikipedia articles of their own, and the only coverage of those awards are on the websites for the awards … . Happy Editing! &mdash;  00:00, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha Quadrant    talk    00:19, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep: I was all primed to make jokes about having an article on a hair stylist (e.g., Tara Smith (hot dog vendor), certain parentheticals cry out "not notable!"), but then I saw some of alf.laylah.wa.laylah sources and did some more searching of my own and was flummoxed to find she is indeed notable.--Milowent • talkblp-r 18:19, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment The BBC article, along with the others, makes it a close call, I now think. But even with the BBC article, is this enough to actually write an article? Novaseminary (talk) 21:47, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Nothing is wrong with a short article, we have too many puffed up biographies as it is!--Milowent • talkblp-r 00:03, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You are 110% correct with the second part of your sentence! And I generally agree with the first, but I'm still not entirely convinced that a list of clients and a marathon participation is enough breadth/depth of coverage to really support even a (worthwhile) short article. Novaseminary (talk) 02:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Hair stylist? Ye gods. But she's a "Hairstylist to the stars" according to the notable magazine Marie Claire. And Vogue, the BBC... and these are not just passing mentions of her but whole (short) articles mainly about her. She meets the general guideline for notability, I think. Herostratus (talk) 07:12, 4 September 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.