Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christina Kirk

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. – Joe (talk) 14:08, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Kirk

[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)

May not [meet] WP:NACTOR Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:18, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:19, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:19, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:19, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Kirk has received significant coverage in The New York Times and The New Yorker, as cited in the article, both of which are independent of the subject (e.g., Kirk isn't a writer for either of them) and have been determined reliable by discussion. A WP:BEFORE search shows a few more sources, such as this one, which while not as high quality as the NYT or the New Yorker, are likely reliable enough for the purposes of notability. Should meet WP:GNG.--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 19:03, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SkyGazer 512, well it doesn't talk about her. The focus of the article seems to be the series rather than the actress. Heck, she only appears once in the article. Also 2 articles doesn't make it "significant coverage" as needed by GNG. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 19:43, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Significant coverage doesn't mean a set number of sources, GNG just states that it needs to be more than one. I could see what you mean about the article I linked, as you're right that it isn't necessarily the main topic of the article; however, I would say there's enough for the purposes of GNG and believe it barely scrapes though the "significant" criterion. I'm not really sure what you mean by "she only appears once in the article," as it seems to mention several different facts about her several times throughout the article (try searching for Kirk instead of simply Christina Kirk).--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 21:23, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:38, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 22:38, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: she did had some nontrivial roles and there were more than one article on her in the very mainstream newspapers. Good enough for me as far as the notability is concerned. Note also the guideline is not a policy. — Taku (talk) 10:56, 10 December 2018 (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.