Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanessa Lee Evigan

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vanessa Lee Evigan

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

Tagged with {{Notability|biographies}} for about 9 months. The only two sources cited in the article are either non-reliable (the tertiary source TV.com, a wanna-be IMDb competitor with almost no information, and no sources of its own cited) or non-independent (a press release). Her sister and father are notable, but biographical notability is not congenital. Some of the works she has appeared in (according to more tertiary information at IMDb and another similar external link) are notable, but not everyone appearing in a film or TV show absorbs notability by osmosis, either. I opened this pretty much as just a procedural nomination, as I encountered the very long-standing notability dispute tag on this article during random reading, but I have to actually agree with it being there, and enough time to grow a human baby is more than enough time passed for evidence to be added to an article that the subject satisfies the basic notability criteria with multiple, independent instances of non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 09:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Appears to satisfy WP:ENT, and nomination makes no substantive case otherwise. Sourcing issues are solvable and would not require deletion. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Passes WP:ENT. Joe Chill (talk) 20:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I haven't checked out all of her credits but it looks like her roles in notable films and TV shows are mostly bit parts, and her significant roles are in non-notable films, which doesn't seem to meet WP:ENT. TheJazzDalek (talk) 02:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Exactly. Otherwise I would not have nominated this. I've actually dated someone with almost this many acting credits, and if anyone put up an article about her it would be deleted, probably speedily. The article in question here was created and is being considered for keeping because she's an Evigan, not because her own actual contributions to film or any other field are genuinely notable. Cf. her brother, who isn't notable enough for an article here here either, though someone makes sure he and his allegedly more notable band are mentioned in the article on every one of his actually notable relatives, as if notability is going to rub off on him. Some editors like to complete "collections" of celebrities and their offspring, but this isn't IMDb. At best, basic info about Vannessa Lee should merge back into Greg Evigan's article, in family section, per WP:IINFO. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 01:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per meeting WP:ENT and apparently WP:GNG [1]. Yes, a pity that the article had been tagged for so long, but surmountable issues are reasons for fixing a problem, and not for deletion because someone else had not done so. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:58, 12 January 2010 (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.