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.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 00:33, 3 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - I do agree with the nomination, the author should consult WP:RS. The article needs more reliable secondary sources like some already inserted publications from legit magazines. References to forums etc. should be removed.
ThegaBolt (
talk) 18:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 01:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete I'm not seeing much coverage in independent sources, that is, not related to modelling. Fails
WP:BIO.
LibStar (
talk) 04:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Delete kind of not notable model. too much buzz but not reliable references online. --
Mozzcircuit (
talk) 11:39, 11 February 2023 (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.