Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackie Dallas (actress): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 01:16, 19 August 2019

Jackie Dallas (actress)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Actress with a some roles in lesser known shows, or a minor role in a well-known show, but doesn't meet notability criteria. References given mention her as being in the cast, but none are significant coverage of the actress herself. ... discospinster _talk 19:16, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is significant coverage on the shows and films in which she's appeared and she is listed as a credited actress on all of her titles. The size of the role doesn't make any difference as to whether she is credible; she has done a significant amount of work that is accompanied by a significant amount of press. The article writing can change but I don't see the need for more credible press as it's already present and there are nearly 30 sources supporting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannahandos1 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Hannahandos1 It's not about credibility, it's about Notability, which is proven by significant coverage by reliable sources. Also yes, per WP:NACTOR the size of the role played does actually matter when determining notability. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

She has had notable roles in smaller indie films such as The Pining with Tom Sizemore, which have gone on to receive significant press coverage. I will work on filling the article with coverage from her more significant roles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hannahandos1 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deloete when even in a direct-to-video film your role is "waitress" you are just plain not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:05, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Obviously fails the WP:GNG and WP:NACTRESS. Lacks significant roles. -- LACaliNYC ✉ 20:15, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Seems to be fanpage by acct that currently has several articles at AfD. Agricola44 (talk) 01:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 :<small class="delsort-notice">Note:  This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Women|list of Women-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Coolabahapple|Coolabahapple]] ([[User talk:Coolabahapple|talk]]) 13:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)</small>
 *'''Delete''': Obviously fails the [[WP:GNG]] and [[WP:NACTRESS]]. Lacks significant roles. -- [[User:LACaliNYC|<b style="color: #2D68C4;">LA</b><b style="color: #F2A900;">Cali</b><b style="color: #2D68C4;">NYC</b>]][[User talk: LACaliNYC #top|<big>✉</big>]] 20:15, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
+*'''Delete'''. Seems to be fanpage by acct that currently has several articles at AfD. [[User:Agricola44|Agricola44]] ([[User talk:Agricola44|talk]]) 01:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)