Talk:Bridgette Andersen

Sourcing/notability concerns

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

@Paul Benjamin Austin: expressed concerns at the Editor assistance page about the sourcing and notability of this former child actress. There is currently one reference to the Colorado Springs Independent, which probably counts as a reliable source. It is, however, a mere parenthetical sentence fragment that reads: "a year older than Savannah Smiles star Bridgette Andersen, who overdosed on heroin in 1997". Most searches turn up general celebrity sites like IMDB and Find-a-Grave and the like. There are also some biographies on sites of questionable RS status, including Movie Pilot and Daily Hatch. Her WP:GNG notability is questionable. I don't see any evidence of PBA's claim of "...her internet cult following" in these searches, either. The latter would be a qualifying claim under WP:NACTOR#2 so I'm bringing the issue here before nominating for articles for deletion. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:35, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

@Eggishorn: There's a facebook group dedicated to Andersen and before the IMDb shut down its boards, her board there was frequented by the same people too. Everybody has fans, i guess. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 00:18, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

@Paul Benjamin Austin:, there's Facebook group devoted to just about everything. That does not necessarily equate to a ...a large fan base or a significant "cult" following..., however. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:37, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

@Eggishorn: I think you should nominate this article for deletion. She was nominated for awards but never won one. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 01:49, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

I have done an AfD but had to do it manually as Twinkle didn't want to play today so hopefully I've done all the steps correctly. It hasn't been PROD'd previously but I thought an AfD was a better route to try. SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:19, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

reconstitution

I've taken all the reliable sources that were in the article, and wrote as much of an article as could be written with the information in them (the previous version has a lot of supposition and unsupported claims). I plan to incrementally expand the article as best I can. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to ask! — fourthords | =Λ= | 18:36, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

non-free imagery

When I re-wrote this article (see above), I removed File:Bridgette Andersen.jpg from the article. Aspects (talk · contribs) has replaced the file saying, "rv unexplained image deletion". I didn't explicitly speak to the removal (not deletion) of this image, because its presence was itself originally unexplained. According to the FDP, the image's purpose here is "the person in the image is dead and no free images exist". Not only is that not a purpose, but it certainly doesn't meet the non-free content (NFC) criterion. In fact, that's why I didn't place any non-free content in the article: nothing in the prose requires NFC to "significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, [nor would] its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." (WP:NFCC#8)

I've undone Aspects' edit IAW the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, and invite them to discuss here. — fourthords | =Λ= | 19:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

There are two fair use templates listed at the image page and the first one's purpose is "This image is intended to illustrate the person the article is about." Per WP:NFCI #10 of acceptable use of fair use images: "Pictures of deceased persons, in articles about that person, provided that ever obtaining a free close substitute is not reasonably likely." Since she is deceased and it is unlikely to find a free image that could be used instead, this image passes WP:NFCC. I have added back the image until a consensus can be found per WP:BRD. Aspects (talk) 21:35, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Non-free content is a content guideline that says "All non-free images must meet each non-free content criterion; failure to meet those overrides any acceptable allowance here."  Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria is "a Wikipedia policy with legal considerations." It has a number of requirements that File:Bridgette Andersen.jpg doesn't meet.  WP:NFCC#1 requires that "non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available"; I have not (nor is there anything at the FDP indicating that Redsky89 (talk · contribs) has) contacted anybody who might have media of Ms. Andersen that they could and might freely-license. We need evidence that "no free equivalent is available"; we don't operate from that assumption.  WP:NFCC#8 says that "non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." There is no reliably-sourced prose in this article that requires the use of copyrighted material to understand.

I suppose your interpretation is that my reconstitution of the article with reliable-sourcing is the original bold action, and your replacement of the NFC is the reversion. I don't intend to edit war on that point, I just didn't foresee it. — fourthords | =Λ= | 22:15, 29 August 2018 (UTC)