Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ali Lohan

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. (non-admin closure) -- Cheers, Riley 00:05, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Lohan

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

Fails basic notability test: one minor film appearance and an unreleased album, plus being the sister of a celebrity nobody best known for her run-ins with the law? Come on, time we tightened up on such flagrant violations of WP:N... Vox Humana 8' 10:00, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - seems to easily pass the general notability guideline, a search turns up enough reliable sources to vote to keep this, some mistake here? JoshuSasori (talk) 11:38, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- If no response to the above comment, then Keep. JoshuSasori (talk) 00:56, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Meets WP:NACTOR #1 with lead roles in Mostly Ghostly: Who Let the Ghosts Out? and Living Lohan, plus no shortage of press coverage. --Colapeninsula (talk) 17:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - not hugely notable, but sufficiently so to pass our inclusion guidelines. Even if she hasn't done much so far, there's enough coverage in reliable sources to justify an article. Robofish (talk) 14:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Ali Lohan will only turn 19 years old this December. Her career as a fashion model has not received much attention but, she is still signed onto one of the worlds biggest fashion agencies. I believe she is still young and her career could significantly rise at any moment not to mention that she comes from a well known family. Her career in singing may also not received much attention, but she still has a charted song in America(bubbling under hot 100). This article should be kept.StangerManor (talk) 18:43, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per meeting WP:GNG. Does not matter to me whether or not she is related to someone notable (or infamous), just so long as she herself meets our notability criteria... which she does. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:56, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Very much a no-brainer keep - totally passes general notability. Mabalu (talk) 05:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - famous enough. COI alert: we may be distant cousins. Bearian (talk) 18:21, 18 December 2012 (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.