Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carolyn Houlihan

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 delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Carolyn Houlihan[edit]

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

This article has absolutely no reliable sources. IMDb is not a reliable source, and as an unlimited directory can not be in any way shown to demonstrate that someone is notable. Her film roles are not notable, and being Miss Ohio USA is not enough on its own to establish notability. John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:49, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:49, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. SST flyer 12:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. SST flyer 12:21, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This person had two bit-parts that IMDb stated was a "...regrettably fleeting cinematic career.". She won Miss Ohio USA (1979) and competed in the Miss USA pageant. None of this "is "remarkable" or "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"...". A search showed Wikipedia and IMDb, that included the two movies, and nothing else. There is no reference, since IMDb is not acceptable, and certainly not acceptable to support notability. This just leaves Miss Ohio. There is just not enough to support more than four lines of content for a non-notable pseudo-biography. Otr500 (talk) 02:51, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 23:51, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT#DICT This "article" is better suited for a biographical dictionary of the cinema. Also the content is unremarkable and is no different than what a million others could write and therefore lacks "fame, achievement, or perhaps notoriety." If Wikipedia wants to be a dictionary for every human that has ever flirted with fame it's going to be a very busy future. Please delete this article and may this poisonous idea never surface again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:445:8002:BC40:D881:6C8:35AC:EA7C (talk) 12:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- A7 material. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:30, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't meet notability. I suppose if someone can find a redirect target and avoid creating redlink clickbait, that might be worth considering. Montanabw^(talk) 07:02, 5 November 2016 (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.