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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:59, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah M. Baker[edit]

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

I came across this as a speedy deletion, however there's just enough in the article to assert some notability since she was part of a reality TV show. The problem though, is that I really can't see where there's enough overall to truly justify her having an article on Wikipedia. She exists and is active, but she doesn't appear to have received coverage in places that Wikipedia would consider to be reliable. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. She sounds like a fine person, but this autobiography doesn't assert notability per WP:BIO or WP:NACTOR, with no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources. As she notes on the article talk page (speaking about herself in the third person, for some reason), privacy rules forbid her name from being used in the credits. Fair enough, but without references, we have nothing to go on here to judge notability. NeemNarduni2 (talk) 15:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I've waited a few days to allow the original author to beef up the references, but Oxygen's self-promotional releases and Facebook posts aren't it. The sole independent source, a review of the show, which doesn't even mention her, is hardly a strong argument for keeping this article. ShelbyMarion (talk) 19:38, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Self-published references do not demonstrate notability for this autobiographical article. ubiquity (talk) 18:40, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:51, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:51, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Doesn't meet WP:NACTOR, and searches did not turn up enough to show they pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:34, 20 February 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.