Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Swafford

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-10 22:12Z

[edit] Amanda Swafford

Amanda Swafford (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Non-notable losing contestant on a reality television show.Mikeblas 12:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Strong Keep Third place on very popular reality series. Disease has given her extra publicity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Acne Wash (talk • contribs)
  • Delete - second runner up (does that mean third or equal second?) on a reality show doesn't assert notability sufficiently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Budgiekiller (talk • contribs)
  • Strong delete per nom and per ample precedent. Being blind may make her an atypical game show contestant, but it doesn't make her a notable one. Xtifr tälk 20:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Blindness plus ANTM plus multiple articles establishing presence in regional fashion plus national ad campaingn appearances just barely establish notability. Otto4711 15:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Here today, forgotten tomorrow. Ohconfucius 02:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Notable reality contestant. Elcda0 17:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Question - how more notable a reality contestant than all the thousands of others? Budgiekiller 17:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment She came in third place in one of the most popular competitive reality shows on television. I'm not saying all ANTM contestants are notable, but other contestants on ANTM have not received anywhere close to the amount of publicity that Amanda Swafford has received. Her condition (retinitis pigmentosa) has given her a fair amount of notability as well. I've added some external links to her page to justify my vote. Elcda0 17:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - thanks for your comment. Does the candidate really meet WP:N? Budgiekiller 18:11, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment Yes, I believe the publicity she has received for both making it this far on the show and her condition have made her notable enough. However, I certainly understand where other voters would consider her non-notable. Elcda0 22:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Strong Keep I think this person clearly meets notability criteria: "The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person... This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles" Comixboy 23:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, third place on a very popular reality show, I think that's more than enough. Stifle (talk) 19:23, 9 December 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.