Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Cooke (glamour model)
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 03:23, 9 February 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 03:23, 9 February 2023 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. postdlf (talk) 16:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sam Cooke (glamour model)[edit]
- Sam Cooke (glamour model) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
non notable former model WuhWuzDat 15:30, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Apparently still a model, not "former" -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:08, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - assuming it can be shown true, winners of the Page Three annual poll in The Sun would be considered notable as models. Bearian (talk) 21:41, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Bearian. Obviously, we do need to source that, but it would lend sufficient notability to keep. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 13:28, 6 April 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.