Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaitlyn DiBenedetto

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 delete. Courcelles 23:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kaitlyn DiBenedetto

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

As per Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Just_Kait - simply not notable. Slashme (talk) 14:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline Bio by MTV is some indication of notability. But there's no other indicaiton of wp:notability, nor specific content in text that even asserts it. North8000 (talk) 12:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The only one of the WP:MUSIC guidelines that this resembles is "Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.", which of course this hasn't. --Slashme (talk) 12:28, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha Quadrant ^talk 00:21, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Has two third party references indicating a measure of notability, the MTV bio and an interview. Sandstein 05:13, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 08:35, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 08:38, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This has been discussed well enough at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Just_Kait, and the result was delete. If there's no more discussion here, that result should be good enough here. --Slashme (talk) 08:24, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Insufficiently notable. Neutrality^talk 22:39, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. References prove existence, not notability. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 17:28, 8 September 2011 (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.