Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tabitha Lipkin

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. Courcelles (talk) 20:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tabitha Lipkin

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

I came across this as a speedy and there's just enough of an assertion of notability via the beauty contest win and her working for OAN and AWE TV to where this might barely squeak by speedy criteria.

A search, however, showed that she is solidly non-notable per Wikipedia's guidelines and this looks to be just a bit too soon for an entry. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:38, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I agree it's not a speedy, but yes, solidly non-notable at this time. Judging by the username of the creator, User:Tlipkin, this is an autobiography, and I have posted the usual discouraging note about that. Bishonen | talk 08:04, 8 September 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 08:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 08:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 08:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Esquivalience ^t 02:08, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Found nothing substantial in my searches. Rainbow unicorn (talk) 17:16, 19 September 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.