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 delete. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:15, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brittany Lo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Can't find decent sources to support notability under GNG. (Not a deletion rationale, but interesting: article was created by the (now blocked) user Beautini; Lo's company is called Beautini. ) ThatMontrealIP (talk) 08:35, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 09:08, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ~Ruyaba~ {talk} 09:08, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Indeed, WP:GNG is not met, and there is no claim of notability. GregorB (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 19:48, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fails GNG. ♟♙ (talk) 21:16, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not enough for GNG. There was a NewYorkTimes piece on make-up for weddings that gave her a mention (amongst others), but no actual material artical on her from an RS. Britishfinance (talk) 21:13, 15 February 2019 (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.