Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tori Praver

: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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:24, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

=[[Tori Praver]]=

:{{la|Tori Praver}} – (View AfDView log){{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/reports/afd/{{urlencode:Tori Praver}}.html|2=Afd statistics}}

:({{Find sources|Tori Praver}})

Non notable model. Some covers, some works, just that. Damiens.rf 12:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

:Keep: From multiple appearances in the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue to the cover of Vogue to being a spokesmodel for designers like Ralph Lauren and Guess?, I'd say Praver's career is notable enough to warrant this article. Appearing in the SISI in particular should satisfy criteria #1 of WP:ENT.  Mbinebri  talk ← 01:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

::Just a model doing model work. There's no non-trivial coverage about her. SISI does not entails notability, as shown by the very lack of third part coverage about most SISI models. --Damiens.rf 13:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

:::If "Just x doing x" were a valid argument, every bio on Wikipedia could be deleted with it. The question is whether "doing x" is notable, and the [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Tori+Praver%22+source%3A%22-newswire%22+source%3A%22-wire%22+source%3A%22-presswire%22+source%3A%22-PR%22+source%3A%22-release%22+source%3A%22-wikipedia%22&btnG=Search+Archives&scoring=a News link] for this AfD shows coverage in the Honolulu Advertiser, Los Angeles Times, San Jose Mercury News, and SI.com. I can also point to a [http://www.malibumag.com/site/article/tori_praver/ Malibu Magazine article].  Mbinebri  talk ← 17:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:17, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

  • Keep per Mbinebri. - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 00:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Mbinebri is being disingenuous when saying that this argument would delete "every bio on Wikipedia". You really need to be outstanding in your work (actually, life) to deserve a bio on wikipedia. All the "news articles" are just trivial "model profiles" and the trivial model-interviews. --Damiens.rf 11:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Wiki articles are not awards given for being outstanding at life. I'm getting the impression you're among the editors who believe models as a whole are not notable, dismissing all modeling work as only a model modeling and all coverage as trivial, regardless of whether it is or not.  Mbinebri  talk ← 21:49, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm sick of your generalizations. I believe this model is non-notable, and not all of them. And my deletion rationale "just a model doing model work" is an argument for the deletion of this article, and not of "every bio on Wikipedia". Start using some real arguments instead of misreading mine. --Damiens.rf 13:50, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 07:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:05, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Keep as per Mbinebri. Edward321 (talk) 02:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

: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.