Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casandra Stark

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. Mailer Diablo 02:03, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Casandra Stark

This article was written by User:Roger Quid thirteen days ago, which amounted to his only contributions ever. It has been tagged for verification, importance explanation and clean-up, but looking at the history or the user contributions doesn't look like it will ever be fixed. Delete as a non-notable film maker. JIP | Talk 11:14, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Cult film-maker of little note. No claims to notability in article. Did her films win awards or receive critical acclaim? There may be a case for retention if evidence to this effect could be provided. WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 13:09, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but cleanup, following addition of references to article and comments below. (aeropagitica) 14:05, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable - I came across this when I was AfD listing Wooden Thomas which was deleted. I doubt it'll be fixed and even so I don't think it's a notable person. MLA 13:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, bordering on strong keep. Films are verifiable, treated as notable by press which covers "transgressive art." Probably best seen as a cult figure, but her work has been anthologized in the company of clearly substantive figures like Ferlinghetti. Monicasdude 15:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Aero. Deizio 01:25, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. again, per Aero Deizio 14:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep assuming she is the person listed as IMDB here: [1]. JoshuaZ 04:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I added a reference, IMDb link, categories and fixed a red link from Cinema of Transgression where she was already named but with the wrong spelling. Could still use cleanup. Esquizombi 13:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Would anyone have any objection to me removing the "importance" tag? The citations and cleanup ones should stay. Esquizombi 02:42, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep reasonable notability; the Sonic Youth/Richard Kern association is significant. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 23:08, 22 March 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.