Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amber Rose

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 speedy keep. WP:SNOW Close Jac16888 ^Talk 20:53, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amber Rose

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

The subject doesn't meet WP:NOTABILITY. She's mainly noteworthy as the girlfriend of other celebrities, with no distinctions of her own to merit inclusion in Wikipedia. Scaleshombre (talk) 00:28, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject doesn't deserve to meet WP:NOTABILITY. She's mainly noteworthy as the girlfriend of other celebrities, with no distinctions of her own to merit inclusion in Wikipedia. But she meets the GNG. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo) (talk) 01:27, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Coverage in sources such as NY Mag and The Independent focusses on the subject. Andrew D. (talk) 03:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Well... she has been the focus of her own coverage in places like this CNN article about her holding a SlutWalk. I think that her notability is borderline since she is predominantly known for her dating history as opposed to a ton of articles actually about her as an individual, but this might be enough to warrant a keep overall. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Just because a person doesn't really have a good reason to be notable doesn't necessarily mean they aren't, and Amber Rose is definitely mentioned enough in the entertainment press to be notable. Blah2 (talk) 05:30, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 05:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 05:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Marchjuly (talk) 05:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The numerous reliable sources cited in this article show that she meets GNG. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 08:08, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - She quite honestly doesn't even deserve an article but rather annoyingly the article does meet GNG so obvious Keep. –Davey2010^Talk 18:57, 6 October 2015 (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.