Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shelley Blond

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 No consensus. — Scientizzle 16:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shelley Blond

Non-notable actress. No coverage in reliable sources and fails WP:BIO criteria. Valrith 14:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Almost no information is provided, and what little there is would make more sense as a list than anything else. The lead section is the only section in the article, which lacks even a table of contents. Finally, the article has been tagged for expansion since March 2007, with little or no additions since then (5 if you count a bot edit, a revert, and this nomination, 2 if you don't). Therefore, it can be gathered that Shelley Blond has little notability in the community. There is simply not enough information in it to qualify it as anything remotely encyclopedic, and furthermore it merely takes up space on our servers. Arknascar44 ^{¡Hablar Conmigo!} 15:23, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. There is no limit as to the number of topics Wikipedia can cover and not bound by constraints of a paper encyclopedia and there's not practical limit of bandwidth. See also Wiki is not paper.--Oakshade 15:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In principle, yes, I agree, Wikipedia can have as many articles as it wants, but articles like Shelley Blond simply don' t provide enough information on the topic. If there was some more information in the article, then yes, I would vote to keep the article. However, as of now, it seems that deleting the article is the only option (unless someone adds something major to the article, and fast). Arknascar44 ^{¡Hablar Conmigo!} 01:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The original voice of one of the most, if not the most, popular video game characters in history. --Oakshade 15:32, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Arguably notable enough for inclusion (even if just barely). Article could use some fleshing out, but deletion is probably not the solution. Coren 15:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Her screen and videogame resumé falls far short of WP:BIO. Edison 21:21, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, minor actress with no notable roles. Perhaps if she had won an award for her VG acting, but she did not. --Dhartung | Talk 07:27, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would say Lara Croft in the original Tomb Raider, the version that made the game iconic, is a notable role. --Oakshade 15:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. OK, it was only a voice role, and only for the first game, but Lara Croft? Puts her over the line for me. --Groggy Dice T | C 17:26, 22 June 2007 (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.