Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libby Babet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 redirect to The Biggest Loser Australia (season 11). (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 15:40, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Libby Babet[edit]

Libby Babet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

She is just an unnotable reality-television contestant. Grahame (talk) 01:19, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 01:22, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. WP:ENTERTAINER Libby Babet is the trainer/host of The Biggest Loser Australia, replacing well-known fitness expert and TV personality Michelle Bridges. The Biggest Loser is one of Australia's top rating TV shows. There are 98,000 results when searching for "Libby Babet" of which, having checked the first 10 pages, I suspect most if not all are related to this Libby Babet.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] - Tyrone28 (talk) 12:02, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.google.com.au/search?q=%22Libby+Babet%22
  2. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Biggest_Loser_(Australian_TV_series)
  3. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Biggest_Loser_Australia_(season_11)
  4. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Bridges
  5. ^ http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/fitness/weight-loss/the-biggest-loser-trainer-libby-babet-responds-to-criticism-that-at-78kg-nikki-isnt-heavy-enough-to-be-on-the-weight-loss-show/news-story/be2f6d579e5ccfc3ac0a366a7bd99053
  6. ^ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4312050/Biggest-Loser-s-Libby-Babet-train-without-tough-love.html
  7. ^ http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/television/new-the-biggest-loser-trainer-libby-babet-says-she-is-a-different-trainer-than-michelle-bridges/news-story/8ddc671f8824d40b99855c30f1db0b9a
  8. ^ http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/tv-ratings/channel-10-backs-the-biggest-loser-transformed-despite-dismal-ratings-for-launch-episode/news-story/6d760899a88d29f40641f965f371e5a6
  9. ^ https://www.byronnews.com.au/news/whats-small-screen-week/3153493/
  10. ^ http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/television/first-review-of-the-new-series-of-the-biggest-loser-on-channel-ten/news-story/b90c86d2f74edb9b047e0b731a5f16de
  11. ^ http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/lifestyle/health/the-biggest-loser-transformed-nikkis-partner-hasnt-seen-her-naked-in-three-years/news-story/cb20641ae8597ef871711eea3579a62a
  12. ^ http://www.bodyandsoul.com.au/mind-body/wellbeing/libby-babets-letter-to-the-biggest-loser-transformed-contestants/news-story/981bb91c62ae2ba0ae47f75a655858a9
  13. ^ http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/macarthur/biggest-loser-winner-sam-rouen-motivates-new-camden-contestant-simon-cummins/news-story/fd4bde2ba1425cf6edf2f27ab7e165bd
  14. ^ http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/fitness/weight-loss/the-biggest-losers-new-trainer-libby-babet-is-no-strict-paleo-pete/news-story/47b50d189f3633930a561261fcac6e74
  15. ^ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/tvshowbiz/video-1429159/Biggest-Loser-trainer-distances-methods-Michelle-Bridges.html
  16. ^ http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/penrith-press/boxer-fights-bulge-on-biggest-loser/news-story/8b1d4ddff523ea24155af849d0aeffcc
  17. ^ http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/fitness/weight-loss/sydney-personal-trainer-libby-babet-to-replace-michelle-bridges-on-new-season-of-the-biggest-loser/news-story/dbb68399dcf6c3ce04f8f90c476b551d
  18. ^ http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/the-biggest-loser-will-return-in-2017-on-ten-but-with-a-new-look-and-weightloss-focus/news-story/85abf20094f39e615b984fba61b0c7e2
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a contestant, but still not notable. I have not been able to find anything on Babet that is independent and substantial, although this job is made difficult by the enormous amount of marketing fluff that has been generated about and around her, and printed in the TV pages. Would not object to a redirect to The Biggest Loser Australia (season 11) as a plausible search term. Lankiveil (speak to me) 00:44, 19 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]
  • KeepUser already !voted. I'm new here so apologies if I'm off track but here are some more references. Can we also cite printed references? Libby will be on the cover of Women's Fitness Magazine (115K readership) in April with a feature story about her. If this isn't what you mean by independent and substantial could you please clarify?

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

Tyrone28 (talk) 04:04, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Demonstrating notability isn't about the quantity of sources, it's about their quality, and I'm just not seeing the quality needed here. Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:43, 25 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 06:27, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks for the feedback, here's some more information:

Here's another link I found:

I assume printed sources are just as valid as online? For example, how can I reference various profiles in major magazines such as Who, OK! and Women's Fitness Magazine? Would being profiled in significant print publications qualify as independent and quality references?

Tyrone28 (talk) 10:32, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's heaps of speaking engagements here, but you're not showing me anything that amounts of substantial coverage of Babet herself that hasn't been paid for. She's got a good publicist obviously, but an advertorial piece in a "lifestyle magazine" is not reliable coverage. I have to ask, what is your connection (if any) with Babet or The Biggest Loser? Lankiveil (speak to me) 23:33, 29 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I will relist this. The reference lists make this AFD a mess to look at yet there's only been 2 contributions beyond the nominator, which are split. Lots of links and evidence but no consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KaisaL (talk) 02:56, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Zero participation since last relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades Godric 04:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/Redirect per Lankiveil's 19 March suggestion. I don't see anything establishing independent notability just yet, and given the performance of the show there's a possibility there never will be any, but for now it seems to make sense to include a brief background in the article on the series in question. If/when her career takes off, there's no prejudice towards re-creating an independent article. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:28, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect (cleaning out the Relisted 3 times or more cat) Would not object to a redirect per Lankiveil L3X1 (distant write) 14:46, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to Lankiveil none of the coverage is paid coverage, Libby does not have a publicist and I am part of Libby's team. As I said, there are numerous magazine articles in print, including covers of major magazines which are independent (not about Biggest Loser) that I cannot reference here as they are not available online. Surely offline references are just as valid as online? Tyrone28 (talk) 21:02, 11 April 2017 (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.