Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrea Rosen

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 of the debate was Keep. --F a ng Aili ^說嗎? 00:10, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andrea_Rosen

vanity. Endless Shrimp 00:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. None of her credits on IMDb indicate that she has moved beyond minor roles. This would need verifiable media reports if it is to avoid deletion. Capitalistroadster 00:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- IMDb's credits are wrong. It lists her in at least one film in which she did not appear. Her wikipedia entry listed 4 films until very recently. Resume padding.
delete* fluff Williamb 03:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I have corrected the errors from IMDB. Furthermore, WP:BIO doesn't call for the deletion of a writer/actress whose "failure" is acheivement in TV and theater rather than movies. --M @r ē ino 03:43, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- I just noticed that Endless Shrimp's account has no edits before proposing this page for deletion. --M @r ē ino 03:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Please do not bite the newcomers. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Endless Shrimp (talk • contribs) \
- Comment, please remember to sign your comments. SorryGuy 04:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not biting. The rules that admins use to determine afd results specifically say that admins need to consider the possibility "'bad faith' opinions(, which sometimes but not always) include those being made by sock puppets, being made anonymously, or being made using a new userid whose only edits are to the article in question and the voting on that article."--M @r ē ino 04:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's sourced. Stella (TV series) links to it. Keep. Fagstein 05:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Following verification in article. Capitalistroadster 05:40, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep slightly notable.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! 08:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets WP:BIO in my opinion. -- Samir (the scope) 08:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but barely. 100K google results on her name indicates at least some significant interest in this person. Article needs work. Quatloo 09:33, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Just pointing out that most of the 100K google results on the name refer to the curator of a well-established NYC art gallery. Not the same person. Endless Shrimp 15:00, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This rides the edge of notability, but when in doubt it never hurts to be a little more inclusive. NoIdeaNick 09:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable celebrity, meets WP:BIO. --Ter e nc e Ong 11:07, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I say - Keep is notable and encyclopedic :) --Andy123(talk) 12:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep slightly notable Funky Monkey (talk) 18:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems to easily meet WP:BIO. Wstaffor 22:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, the NYC Fringe Festival alone should be enough, as it's a quite significant stage. Monicasdude 02:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The word "fringe" should be a clue there, hoss.--Calton | Talk 06:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The name "Fringe Festival" is self-consciously ironic; the event itself is well-known and extremely well-regarded. There are "Fringe Festivals" in major cities around the English-speaking world and more, including New York, Philadelphia, Boulder, San Francisco, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Toronto, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Ottawa, Melbourne, Prague, Singapore, Dublin, Brighton, Bath, and Edinburgh. Some are more substantial than others; the New York City event is extremely well-known, regularly covered in depth and treated as notable by media like the New York Times. The name, as I recall, goes back to one of the UK events in the late 1940s, staged in an area of the involved city known as "the Fringe". The last time I checked, an ironic name was not grounds for deprecating an otherwise substantial event. Monicasdude 15:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that this discussion was about keeping or deleting any "Fringe" festival articles. And yes, the various "Fringe" festivals themselves are very notable. But what sort of individuals -- you know, the actual topic under discussion -- perform at the various "Fringe" festivals? Hmmm, the word "Fringe" should be a clue there, hoss. --Calton | Talk 08:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's sort of a flimsy criterion. The festival is substantial—in a commercial sense—but the same can't automatically be said of individual participants. Should every single musician who participates in the CMJ Music Marathon or SXSW have their own wikipedia article? Endless Shrimp 20:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:BIO:

Widely recognized entertainment personalities and opinion makers (ie - Hollywood Walk of Fame)? Nope.
# Notable actors and television personalities who have appeared in well-known films or television productions. A regular in a failed basic-cable series? Nope.

--Calton | Talk 06:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Just because someone doesn't fall into one of these categories doesn't mean an article on the person should automatically be deleted."--M @r ē ino 18:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And just because they got a listing on IMDB or collected a couple of paychecks doesn't mean they should be kept, either. --Calton | Talk 08:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as corrected by Mareino. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:22, 20 April 2006 (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.