Deletion of Sheree Silver (2nd nomination)

Comment: Non-notable. Being a "good interview" on ''Good Morning America'', appearing on a reality TV show, and being discussed in the local newspaper are not sufficient to make a person |notable. Additionally, as others have pointed out, many of the citations in the article are non- and/or don't actually support the information in the article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:RS)

Comment: blatantly promotional article with not enough |reliable sources ''about'' her to satisfy 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N)

Comment: meets ,  is not a rationale for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:IDONTLIKEIT)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: Silver - at the very least - passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines. More specifically, I'll try to explain ''why.'' First, otability says, ''topic notability on Wikipedia is not necessarily dependent on things like fame, importance, or the popularity of a topic — although those may contribute... If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article.'' Significant coverage (directly in regards to Silver) is present in the two Wife Swap shows, the GMA Now interview, the Sirius Satellite Radio interview(s), and the feature article(s) in local/national papers. The '''majority''' of these sources in addition to the rest of the article's are "reliable," "secondary," and "independent of the subject," also passing ONEEVENT. I might have a personal belief regarding metaphysics, but I'm confident that the sources speak for themselves. While message boards/blogs are generally not appropriate for inclusion in the article itself, I listed a lot of examples of these in Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2009_March_14, showing that Silver has been discussed many times by the general public, as well. Before one considers deletion, we should first ask ourselves what is notable. Silver is not a Sylvia Browne, but she's been covered enough to warrant an article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: This article clearly meets the general criteria for  as the topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABILITY)

Comment: If I were King of Wikipedia, I would agree with the nominator, and the article needs a real scrubbing, but the  standards are objective, not subjective, and with a rewrite, this article would squeak by under that standard. However, I would prefer a '''merge and redirect''' to Wife Swap or List of episodes of Wife Swap
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: While full of admiration for Spring12's monumental efforts, and for his remaining |civil under pressure, I think the question at issue here is whether very large amounts of basically trivial coverage achieves "notability" per the GNG. That's a judgement call, but the ''spirit'' of  can be seen in subsections like  and . If you consider what's needed to qualify under one of those sections, I don't think we have notability here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Civility (WP:CIVIL||WP:N||WP:PROF||WP:ENTERTAINER)