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. MBisanz ^talk 00:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nikki Dubose (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

No assertion of notability. Being featured in an article on maxim.com is not enough nor is being a reporter for a TV show that's not notable enough to have its own wikipedia article (XLTV). The (non existent?) Wall Street Journal article does nothing to establish notability either per WP:ONEEVENT, WP:NPF, etc. Misterdiscreet (talk) 18:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• KEEP: I've seen her in not only Maxim but also Guess Jeans ads. Upon further googling, she's been in quite a few other major ad campaigns as well and therefore should at least have an article here, I'll see if I can't add some more sources/online ads to the page later. Another-anomaly (talk) 22:53, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • i cannot comment on sources that have yet to be added, however, appearing in a Guess Jeans ad does not make one notable anymore than it makes the table that appeared in the ad notable or the cloud that appeared in the ad Misterdiscreet (talk) 00:51, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Based just on the references and external links she meets the General notability guideline criteria. Untick (talk) 23:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • which ones in particular? her myspace.com page, perhaps? after all, everyone with myspace account should have a wikipedia page, shouldn't they? maybe her website is what makes her notable, WP:SPS be damned! i've already addressed the (non existent) Wall Street Journal article Misterdiscreet (talk) 00:51, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Wall Street Journal article the page links to is missing due to a major site change since the article was published - just google/wayback the link and look at the cached text, and apparently the updated article has not yet been found. Also, your comments borderline on breaking WP:CIVIL, so please watch your tone when discussing this. Another-anomaly (talk) 01:18, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • as i said i already addressed the Wall Street Journal article. see WP:ONEEVENT, WP:NPF, etc. and while you're at it, reread my initial nomination so that i don't have to repeat myself in the future Misterdiscreet (talk) 01:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I've replaced the broken link with the findarticles archive. It's a MarketWatch story actually, which is a sister publication of the WSJ. WP:ONEEVENT doesn't apply here by the way - we're not claiming notability because of a single event. If the article said she was famous because of the mentioned event, that would be different. Orpheus (talk) 05:06, 22 March 2009 (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.