Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chloe Coscarelli

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 Keep. (non-admin closure) Swarm ^X 20:24, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chloe Coscarelli[edit]

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

Some trivial coverage for winning one show, [1]. I really don't imagine that this counts as significant coverage. She certainly does not stand out in her profession - there are hundreds of identically important people who win minor TV cooking shows every day. Jay _{Σεβαστός}^discuss 22:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, MacMed^talk _stalk 22:15, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as subject is the focus of sustained coverage by reliable third-party sources, including The New York Times, several of which focus on her as a vegan chef and a person, not simply a reality show winner. I have significantly overhauled the article since its initial nomination and invite any interested editor to review the article in its current state. (Does it still need expansion? Sure, but there are many sources available for any motivated editor to do just that. AfD is not cleanup.) - Dravecky (talk) 06:00, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per Dravecky. agree with the user..--BabbaQ (talk) 14:45, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Dravecky's edits save the day; subject has coverage in multiple WP:RS, and notability (though thin) is clear. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 14:26, 15 April 2011 (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.