The result was keep. sufficient consensus that she is notable enough due to extensive coverage JForget 00:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Celebrespawn's main activity seems to be getting herself in trouble. No notability, serious BLP questions -- her sorrows are referenced, but even so do we need to shout them at the world? == no article. Herostratus ( talk) 13:11, 5 July 2010 (UTC) reply
We also do not limit Wikipedia to articles on people who we think have made constructive contributions to the world, which would also be an unworkable and completely POV standard. I don't think Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian have made any lasting contributions to...anything...but they are indisputably notable despite being, in my POV, useless (see also Virginie Amélie Avegno Gautreau for someone I've often thought of as a 19th century Paris Hilton; when the first and most apt word to describe someone's accomplishments is "socialite", you probably haven't done much to advance civilization). And how could I forget: The New York Times ran a feature entirely about Snooki for god's sake. [1] Such is western culture. I think this is overused as a retort, but here it is appropriate: please read WP:IDONTLIKEIT and rethink your comments. postdlf ( talk) 19:41, 2 August 2010 (UTC) reply