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. JohnCD (talk) 16:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jenni Engebretsen

[edit]

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

Her mid-level political and business positions don't appear to satisfy WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:29, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable PR person.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:26, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep In addition to the state.com piece already used in the article, here is an NYT piece covering her wedding, and a whole bunch of brief mentions covering her work both with the DNC and the RIAA: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. That said, most of these mentions are very brief; so she clears GNG, but just barely. Vanamonde93 (talk) 07:04, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep surprisingly for a person of this professional title there is a modest amount of biographical content in the public record. I see that the article currently omits some of her prior professional experience in the record industry, which augments a presentation of her biographical sketch. Generally, I would discard an article based on a wedding announcement (which does not undergo normal editorial processes and is often self authored). However, here we can sketch elements of her biogfaphy via the public record and thus she clears GNG.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:50, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 07:38, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 07:38, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:22, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 20:00, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notability has been (barely) established by the sources provided. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 22:09, 12 July 2016 (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.