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. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:10, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Sedokova

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable in her own right and only assertion of notability relates to membership of Nu Virgos. On ref in Russian and other is publicity material. Merge with Nu Vigos would be best option. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 13:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:39, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:39, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep if you take a look here, at the Russian version of the article, you can find among the references enough significant coverage on secondary reliable sources to reasonably substain a claim of (individual) notability. And a lot of coverage could be added searching for "Анна Седокова" on Google. She has more than 1.500 enties on Google News.Cavarrone (talk) 07:47, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 13:46, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The sources cited in the Russian version of the article look more than adequate for notability.--Michig (talk) 20:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete. To the best of my sufficiently qualified local knowledge, Anna is just another big-breasted model whose name happened to be intensively used for SEO and other marketing purposes. All "references" discussed above are just outstanding examples of media trash. People doing that should not be allowed to continue their business on Wikipedia. Ukrained (talk) 00:25, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The RSs covered here sufficiently to establish notability. I really don't think that guesses as to why they did so should impact my !vote.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per Cavarrone and passes WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:04, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.