Deletion of Being Born Again Couture Fashion Show

Comment: fails WP:GNG. 1 gnews hit which is its own website http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Being+Born+Again+Couture+Fashion+Show%22&tbm=nws&tbs=ar:1 and nothing on a major Australian news website http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Being+Born+Again+Couture+Fashion+Show%22+site%3A.news.com.au&oq=%22Being+Born+Again+Couture+Fashion+Show%22+site%3A.news.com.au&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=437l3812l0l3937l18l17l0l12l0l0l390l390l3-1l1l0. long winded arguments trying to defend this article's existence indicate a |conflict of interest. this is an issue as WP is being used as a vehicle to promote a non notable entity
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)

Comment: This and a handful of other non-notable articles centered on Davina Reichman should probably go. Shockingly, they seem to have the same major contributors.  and  both unambiguously indicate this particular article is not notable; a stand alone article on a non-notable subject is unencyclopedic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NN||WP:ORG)