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. Majorly (Talk) 23:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Lynn[edit]

Alex Lynn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Fails WP:NN. Subject's biggest claim to fame seems to be the title of Miss 2004 Beijing China Hawaiian Tropic International. (Also under "Awards" is "2006 Asian Beauty Calendar" - so I guess she won that calendar?) Mostly, this looks like a promo for her website. TruthGal 00:35, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A question as I am still relatively new to this process: Do I need to actually say Delete or is that assumed (as I nominated the entry for deletion)? TruthGal 21:56, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you nominated the article for deletion and explained why, then that is sufficient. Of course though, you can contribute to the subsequent debate by providing additional insight. This process is not meant to be a vote, but rather a discussion with the purpose of reaching a consensus. TSO1D 01:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TruthGal 06:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep seems to be a notable model, has won Mis Hawaiian Tropic International twice, could use a little bit of a clean up with the links though --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 00:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • What article claims is not that she's won Miss Hawaiian Tropic International twice but the titles "Miss 2004 Beijing China Hawaiian Tropic International" and "Miss 2005 Hong Kong Hawaiian Tropic International." If you do a Google search for both titles [1] [2], you'll find no independent corroborating article for either.TruthGal 01:27, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This article needs work, but the topic is notable with many non-trivial sources on Yahoo. Got over 500 Yahoo hits for "Alex Lynn" model. --Kevin Murray 08:09, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might I ask... notable for what? Article says she's a "popular Asian model," but not popular enough to have been in any mainstream magazine (Vogue, Elle) or notable adult magazine (Playboy, Perfect 10). Best I can tell, she's one of those gals who walks around in skimpy outfits at import car shows. Two other "import car models" of her ilk were just removed from Wikipedia for non-notability: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lianne_Lin and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Flo_Jalin

Comment to above (anonymouse) poster. While I'm not 'voting' on this afd, I'd like to point out that your definition of 'mainstream' publications only seems to include major English publications popular in the US and possibly the UK. Given that this is an Asian model who has supposedly (though not verifiably) won some international/Asian awards it is possible she is notable in Asia (where, you know, half the world's population is located) without having appeared in notable American publications. --The Way 08:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Article doesn't claim that the subject has appeared in a single magazine in all of Asia - so, you know, maybe you shouldn't assume that. TruthGal 21:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Lynn does not appear to be notable in any field of modeling. Her personal web site is a year old but has traffic too low to be measured by Alexa, ranking as the 1,959,529th most popular site on the web. Only 805 pages in Google contain the terms "Alex Lynn" and model. Dtdennis 15:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This entry seems more appropriate for MySpace.com. None of the sites being promoted in this entry have Wikipedia entries; if those sites aren't notable enough to be listed here, why should one (of perhaps thousands) of their nude models be listed? Bourne 21:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Quarl ^(talk) 01:39, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I agree with the nomination. No non-trivial independent sources corroborate her importance, thus the article fails WP:BIO. TSO1D 01:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The article needs to be cleaned up but the subject would appear to be notable per the info presented by the article (i.e. her award winnings) and the info presented by Kevin Murray. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 01:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I reiterate that her "award winnings" are not verifiable. If you do a Google search for both titles [3] [4], you'll find no independent corroborating article for either. Also, there is no listing for either her or her supposed award titles at pageant.com TruthGal 06:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom. Not clear the pageant is encyclopedically notable Bwithh 02:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Why is this getting relisted? This is not a vote and her only claims of "notability" have no verification by reliable sources and appear to be non-notable as well. Non-notable model advertisment = delete. NeoFreak 02:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom --RaiderAspect 03:49, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep , but give serious warning--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 05:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bad article! Bad! If you don't get more notable and provide yourself with some reliable sources you're out of here!" Well, there we are...give it oh say...4, 5 days to celan up its act? NeoFreak 05:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete NN, fails WP:V. This seems like a vanity article to me. Davidpdx 14:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. NN. The Hawaiian Tropic International award is hardly grounds for notability. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 18:50, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete need better sources and a more pretigious award to be notable.-- danntm ^T _C 20:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Currently not notable. --Wildnox(talk) 21:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, competition win in itself does not seem to establish notability. Seraphimblade 00:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it is verifiable enough --Sandy Scott 00:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep She meets WP:Notability. She is notable, although her page may need some work. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 00:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment No, no she doesn't. Are we reading the same guildline? Please tell me what portion of WP:N or WP:BIO you pulled that observation from. NeoFreak 02:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep per Sharkface. Just H 00:52, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Delete seems to be a working model but unless she's recognized by a more notable source than IGN Babes I don't think she makes the cut. The "titles" seem to be the sort of manufactured awards agencies give their models to make them more marketable rather than awarads won in actual competitions. --Duke of Duchess Street 02:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. When a subject's tits and sex appeal (and awards resulting from it) are the only bits of notability, there needs to be strong evidence that they are worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia along with the tens of thousands of other chicks with nice racks. BTW, nice rack. --- RockMFR 05:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, non-notable wannabee who has three names when one will do and a "regular at import car shows". "Miss Hawaiian Tropic" is not even a light year from Miss World. Ohconfucius 09:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Dekimasu 14:33, 2 January 2007 (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.