Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Blain
Lack of evidence of persistent notability based on substantial coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Sources are heavily dependent on subject's own press releases and lack independence. No evidence that the subject has garnered any lasting notability. Heavily promotional in tone, reads like an advertisment, and full of puffery. Rewriting won't solve anything. Nothing in the article is of encyclopedic value. Arguement for keep boils down to , none of which does much to establish notability, even if taken together. There's a good reason why this article was rejected at AFC
— User:Dominus, 11:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:LOTSOFSOURCES (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)