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 delete. MBisanz ^talk 03:51, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Garst[edit]

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

Subject is not notable ElKevbo (talk) 20:47, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The 2 award wins (minor awards) and the Forbes Top 50 Social Media Influencers show an emerging notability but not enough yet to pass WP:GNG. The problem is the sources are either not in-depth (except the Digital Journal interview[1]), or primary source, or not reliable (many of these). The Forbes Top 50 is the probably the strongest claim to notability, but unclear how significant the list is (first time published?). -- Green Cardamom (talk) 03:09, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per Green Cardamom. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:37, 28 November 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.