Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coleen Rooney

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:47, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coleen Rooney[edit]

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

Seems to fail WP:BIO and general notability guidelines. scope_creep (talk)18:02, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Although she was originally known as the wife of a footballer she seems to have done enough to meet the general notability guidelines now, with multiple big-news modelling roles, presenting, along with a DVD and autobiography. Whether or not we like the celebrity status afforded to footballers wives, she seems notable enough according to the guidelines. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 21:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep None of this is the sort of notability I care for but it seems to be notability all the same in terms of Wikipedia:Notability (people) although I would welcome guidance there for the notability of "celebraties". References seem OK. I think some tittle-tattle should be removed. Thincat (talk) 21:21, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – there are dozens of references: Daily Mail, Times Online, BBC. An astonishing afd; she's been notable for years. 78.151.72.162 (talk) 01:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. WP:BIO says A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.. Look at the list of references. Chris (talk) 17:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 16 August 2010 (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.