Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debbie Loeb

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. The arguments for keep prevail in my opinion. Article needs some work, though. Tone 22:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Debbie Loeb[edit]

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

no referances, doesn't seem notable at all Alan - talk 23:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 00:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All I could find is a few-sentence blurb about some MTV promos she did in an Entertainment Weekly article[1] (I don't know if there's a defining line between "trivial" and "significant", but I don't think it meets the latter), and a review of her "Faraway" single in Billboard[2]. Page 79 of the same issue lists the single at number 17 on the Hot Dance Airplay chart. Would like to see if there's anything else out there. Gongshow ^Talk 05:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article says: "She is best known for appearing as herself in her sister's reality-based series..." (referring to Lisa Loeb) WP:BIO says: "That person A has a relationship with well-known person B [...], is not a reason for a standalone article on A." Therefore, since what she's best known for is being the sister of someone notable, she does not fit the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. – jaksmata 18:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – Her single was reviewed by Billboard and it charted on a speciality chart – those are fair indications of notability per WP:MUSICBIO. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 10:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Although she might passMUSICBIO, I belive that she still fails the general notability guideline. Click23 (talk) 14:37, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. She's received a few passing mentions in the press over the years. Having a single halfway up a minor airplay chart, presenting some promos on MTV, and appearing on your sister's reality show does not make someone notable. Fences&Windows 18:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Just enough coverage to establish notability, and a plausible search term, even though most of the searches would for "Whatever happened to .. . ." purposes. 71.235.38.171 (talk) 19:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A charting single (even in one of the minor Billboard charts) passes WP:NM, and her TV presenting work also contributes towards general notability. Although WP:BIO guidelines state that relationship to a notable person is not in itself justification for a separate article, it does not state that celebrities' relatives with separate claims to notability should be excluded just because their relationship to someone famous is the main reason they're known to the public: if that were a valid argument we could lose the articles on, for example, Peaches Geldof, Kelly Osbourne, and if we were to take it to extremes, even Linda McCartney. Contains Mild Peril (talk) 02:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per CMP.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep please if she has a charting single that should be notable for us yuckfoo (talk) 01:03, 8 December 2009 (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.