Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bailey Ryan

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:57, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bailey Ryan[edit]

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

A sex advice columnist for a magazine, cited to her column in the magazine. Even her IMDb profile says she's only secured a few small acting roles, so her acting appears to be non-notable. The 'notability' tag was removed from the article almost immediately, so there seems little enthusiasm (or possibility) for the article to be improved, and I can't see any evidence of notability online. Sionk (talk) 16:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bailey Ryan has also garnered a huge fan base on Twitter, having over 60 thousand fans as of 10/13/2013, for which other notable people have been recognized on Wikipedia (Including Rob Delaney and Megan Amram). Her appearances as a celebrity guest at the Tom Leykis listener show, Brian Howard radio show, and inclusion in MCM's top ten list, make her notable enough for Wikipedia. Her upcoming filmography will be added as it becomes available online. ojoruuso (ojoruuso) 17:12, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can't see how the subject is notable. One of her greatest "claims to fame" is that she was selected as "One of the hottest girls of World of Warcraft" by Men's Confidence Magazine which happens to use a photo of the her for their banner heading. Why? Because, "Bailey Ryan is our resident relationship expert and senior editor". Yep, she was put on that list (which otherwise includes only A-list celebrities) by her "magazine" (blog) colleagues. Everything else is either unreliable (other blogs or IMDB) or is coverage by her (which might not be considered reliable anyway) rather than coverage of her which is what we need for WP:GNG. Stalwart111 22:39, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Little actual coverage of the subject that qualifies as substantial, neutral, or independent, mostly just references to interviews with Bailey. Simply having 60K followers on twitter or a cameo in a movie is not sufficient to establish notability. That the path for some to become notable *initiated* by Twitter followship, it was subsequent events that resulted in notability, not merely being popular on Twitter themselves.CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 21:59, 20 October 2013 (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.