Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marki Ann Meyer

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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marki Ann Meyer[edit]

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

Delete. Notability is not established in accordance with WP:ENT or WP:GNG. Lack of significant, reliable, and independent sources. Subject lacks significant roles in television and films. Cind.amuse 08:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I said in the AFD for Sierra McCormick that I wasn't sure whether the students in Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader? would count as having significant roles—but in this case that's unimportant, because even if you do count that she doesn't appear to have had any other significant roles, so she still fails the guidelines in WP:ENT requiring significant roles in multiple notable productions. ----Smeazel (talk) 10:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Rhetorical Comment Well, since I was the creator of this article, and obviously I would like to see it stay, I'm not going to make the obvious keep vote, since I know it would be disregarded anyway, so there is just this comment: What I truly don't get is that people are so anal here on wikipedia about certain things. It's an online encyclopedia, and this article is probably no more then 1MB in size, yet people get all in a tizzie because some article isn't up the some standard of what is notable and important. Just because it's not important to others doesn't mean it's not important to some one else. Having the rules on making sure the articles are complete and accurate are very important, and styled correctly, but to delete articles because some of some rule created to clean up wikipedia to keep it to only encyclopedic suitability is, in MY humble opinion, stupid and asinine. Anyway, I've said my piece, and will let the dice fall where they may in regards to this AfD.--C.J. (talk • contribs) 03:33, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Opps, apparently I forgot to put my signature in. Also wonder if people will realize that my comment is rhetorical and for the record only.--C.J. (talk • contribs) 03:33, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment Well, yes, obviously everything is important to somebody. That's not the point. Wikipedia isn't a personal webpage or a place to promote unknown/"up and coming" actors. There have to be some standards, or everyone could just write articles about themselves and their friends, and Wikipedia would become a useless collection of vanity pages. That's the kind of thing the Wikipedia notability guidelines exist to avoid. (It has nothing to do with storage space.) There can be disagreement about where that line is drawn—personally, I tend to think lately Wikipedia editors in general have tended a bit too much toward deletionism. But the line has to be drawn somewhere, and according to current guidelines this article seems to me to fall fairly unambiguously on the wrong side of the line. I'm sorry if this person is important to you, but that's not the standard for inclusion on Wikipedia. Most people's grandmothers are probably very important to them, but that doesn't mean everyone's grandma should have a Wikipedia article. ----Smeazel (talk) 03:19, 27 May 2011 (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.