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.
WP:BLP of an actress, whose claims of notability are referenced entirely to
primary sources that cannot support notability. If you're shooting for "notable because she's had roles", rather than "notable because she won a major acting award for one of those roles", then the notability clinch is not in the list of roles itself, but in the depth and breadth of
reliable source coverage about her in media that can be shown to get her over
WP:GNGfor the having of roles. But the only sources here are the
self published press kit of one film she was in, and her
IMDb profile -- neither of which are notability-supporting sources.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:27, 15 April 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete does not meet any interpretation of notability. I have to admit I think we have erred too much on the side of accepting the notability of almost all actors and actresses as long as they had a role in a notable film. I think we need to rethink both what we consider notable films and notable actors. We have too many articles at present that are shallow coverage of people mainly based on IMDb.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 03:23, 19 April 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete per statements above. Additionally, I googled her and basically found nothing, which shouldn't be the case for a notable actress of her age.
wikitigresito (
talk) 15:18, 23 April 2018 (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.