Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joann Condon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. (non-admin closure) ;; Maddy ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ :: talk  15:02, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joann Condon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No significant coverage and only one major role. SL93 (talk) 11:16, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of pieces about her, it's not exactly top quality, but want to hear from the nominator what you thought of these?
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/tv/little-britain-cast-now-bbc-23062368 (note this lists other roles, suggesting errors in the nomination justification)
https://www.shropshirelive.com/entertainment/2021/06/18/ludlow-fringe-festival-to-welcome-joann-condon/
Currently learning borderline keep CT55555 (talk) 00:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
CT55555 I made no error because I said major roles. Little Britain is her only major role while the other ones were only for a few episodes. I'm not sure if the first source helps notability due to mentioning several cast members. SL93 (talk) 03:23, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair. It was her only major role. CT55555 (talk) 03:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 12:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not eligible for a withdrawal, because another editor voted delete besides yourself. But the closer will see by your comment that your opinion has changed. At this point I think there is a clear keep consensus. Best.4meter4 (talk) 01:33, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I wish that rule would be changed somewhat since the comment is now invalid. SL93 (talk) 01:39, 16 June 2022 (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.