Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ann Gosling

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. Black Kite (talk) 01:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ann Gosling[edit]

[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)

Is this person sufficiently notable? Her tv career seems to consist solely of starring in a show that hasn't been on tv in over 20 years. Alligators1974 (talk) 21:56, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Alligators1974 (talk) 21:56, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The nominator seems to think that older shows have less weight than current shows. This is not the case. She starred on a show. The article needs improvement, but it doesn't matter whether a show was made 60 years ago 20 years ago, 10 seconds ago, or next week. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 01:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as she meets WP:ENT #1: "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." She was in half the episodes of Chandler and Co (and high in billing) plus her role in Next of Kin. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 01:30, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as WP:ENT and remind nominator that age of the TV series is irrelevant. PamD 09:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the aticle lacks multiple, reliable, in-depth, 3rd party secondary sources needed to pass GNG. IMDb is not reliable and one source is never enough to pass GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: Arguably, the first criterion of WP:NACTOR is made out (although the two TV series themselves don't appear to be overly notable), but I haven't been able to find any sourcing that would satisfy WP:GNG. If more sources can be found, I will update my vote. For the moment, though, the article doesn't quite cross over into "Keep territory", for me. (In regard to the nomination itself, the fact that the subject's last role was more than 20 years ago is not relevant, but the question of whether she is "sufficiently notable" or not is certainly appropriate for an AfD.) Dflaw4 (talk) 18:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:34, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - terrible article, which fails even to say her early roles were playing teenagers. But 3rd-listed actor in a 3-series BBC sitcom with 1.5 big stars, easily passes WP:ENT #1. Inexperienced nom? Johnbod (talk) 21:45, 28 May 2020 (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.