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. I'm going to withdraw this nomination due to the arguments of others, as they provide a convincing counterargument for me to agree upon her notability here. (non-admin closure) Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:37, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Danielle Colby-Cushman[edit]

Danielle Colby-Cushman (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)

I am not seeing any notability here, and the article seems to be more of a promotion of Cushman in an attempt to make her seem notable. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 17:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Keep - A co-star on a highly-popular, multiple-season television show. Obviously notable. Article contains several reliable sources establishing notability and a search of Google News Archives brings up many more [1]. - Who is John Galt? ✉ 17:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable. meets WP:BIO --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment See this debate for the discussions on her co-stars. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• KEEP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.217.28.200 (talk) 07:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The references need to be cleaned up to show the works. Once this is done you will see that sources from all around the country write about this subject. She passes WP:GNG, if nothing else.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:17, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE: Delete this article, this is ridiculas... Danielle has tried in the past to have her own Wiki page, which was deleted. Self promotion with a very obvious inflated sense of importance. If She gets a Wiki page, every stripper on earth gets one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.72.14 (talk) 21:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• DELETE at best a mention on the American Pickers page is all she should hope for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.226.44.27 (talk) 03:23, 1 December 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.