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 procedural close. The nominator has been indefinitely blocked (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KiwiMan) and no !votes for deletion are otherwise present, so procedurally closing at this time. No prejudice against re-nomination for deletion by a user in good standing. North America1000 10:11, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brooke Howard-Smith[edit]

Brooke Howard-Smith (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Sources are not notable. TV Personality is simply not notable enough for Wikipedia. One4Onenz (talk) 02:38, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that the nominator's account has been reported to SPI. Schwede66 17:41, 5 January 2017 (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.