Deletion of Z LaLa (2nd nomination)

Comment: I revised the organization of the article, added a reference from ''HuffPost'', and edited . Per , Z LaLa had a single on the Billboard chart for twelve weeks, with a peak position of 10, so notability is supported. In addition, she objectively appears to have  coverage of her "notable style" in independent and reliable sources (e.g. ''SFGate'', ''HuffPost'', ''Business Insider'', ''E!Online'') because "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipuffery (WP:PUFFERY||WP:MUSICBIO||WP:BASIC)

Comment: it is the second nom. Fails . There is some media presence, but mostly related to her extravagant clothing on a few awards ceremonies
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SINGER)

Comment: According to  &  with significant reliable reference, should stay on Wikipedia
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NMODEL)

Comment: a Wikipedia topic fall for , ''If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.'' This topic has everything that is needed to fulfil General notability guideline. According to  second rule ''(Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart.)'' and serval other rules this topic meets  and singing in lots of different languages isn't minor achievements.  has no guideline for having good third party charting like this (https://www.billboard.com/music/z-lala). The topic also falls under , with ''significant roles in multiple notable singles,  large fan base and made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.'' So this topic is nominated the second time, which seemed clear attack as it was last time
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:SINGER||WP:SINGER||WP:NSINGER||WP:NMODEL)