Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madeline Duggan (2nd nomination)

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 keep. Geschichte (talk) 22:03, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Madeline Duggan[edit]

[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)

Non notable actress - I've added sources to the article however the majority are all credits, Only best sources I've found are this, this and this,

Other than EastEnders she's only played one-bit roles. No objections to redirecting to EastEnders if desired, Potentially meets NACTOR however certainly fails GNG. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep One search on Google is showing me multiple sources about Duggan and her career, such as this, this, this, this, this and this, to name a few, which in itself meets GNG. Her amount of roles also satisfy NACTOR. – DarkGlow (✉) 18:01, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Except all of those sources you provided have all taken content from this very article which is why I've not included those .... I certainly don't agree with filing up the article with "What happened to x" and X is all grown up now". I still don't believe there's any notability here beyond EastEnders and even then there's not much if any. IMHO bar EE she's not significant roles either - most if not all have been one bit roles. Still fails GNG. –Davey2010^Talk 18:27, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Played a major role in one of Britain's biggest series for four years. That equates to notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:40, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:02, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep To the nominators point, the actress has only played two main and large enough roles to have a Wikipedia page, but one of those productions is extremely famous and she plays a very important role in it. It would almost be bizarre if the entire C-class rated article about her character didn't link an actress' Wikipedia page. Speaking more factually, she definitely does pass WP:GNG as mentioned above and in the article, and passes all the points in WP:NACTOR, especially because of her unique and innovative contributions to her field of entertainment. Coreykai (talk) 14:00, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - satisfies NACTOR and the sources available are just about enough for GNG, in my view, she was on the largest UK soap for several years and was a main character during that time so should be kept on that basis alone Spiderone 15:36, 4 January 2021 (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.