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. Agent 86 00:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Model on a few shows an in a magazine, but never with a plot-involved role. Not notable, as far as I can tell. Mikeblas 04:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: Based on the fact that she has been on some of the most famous TV shows and that she is featured on some websites. - Vicer 05:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep of course, she's a model on a few shows and in a magazine. Trollderella 16:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above points. Sharkface217 20:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Unsuitable to merge into Barker's Beauties because of other work involved, and even if it were to be trimmed down it wouldn't really make sense to go there. (IMHO) RFerreira 02:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The other work isn't notable. Non-speaking roles are really no better than extras in movies, and they're certainly not notable even if on screen. -- Mikeblas 17:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per above comments. Simonkoldyk 22:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep please not major notability but enough we are not a paper encyclopedia we have room for this Yuckfoo 22:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep per Yuckfoo, though I despair of a civilisation where the encyclopedias include this sort of thing. WMMartin 17:49, 5 December 2006 (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.