Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chlo Davis

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. Clear consensus to delete (again...with new spelling) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chlo Davis[edit]

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

Declined PROD. Non-notable child actor. Cannot find independent RS confirming notability. Fails WP:NACTOR. Sources are provided in the article, but other than the self-published site, none even mention the subject. At best, this is WP:TOOSOON. Michitaro (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This is likely the re-creation of an article Chloe Davis created by the same user and deleted under A7 on November 23, 2011.Michitaro (talk) 21:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 00:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 00:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 00:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There is no coverage in reliable sources about this child actor. Note that the sourcing in the article consists of Wix (where anyone can create their own wbe site), Twitter (completely unreliable as a source), and a bunch of links which do not mention Davis. -- Whpq (talk) 19:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Doesn't meet WP:NACTOR. Ubelowme (talk) 21:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even though Davis is not mentioned directly in the sources her picture is shown in various of them. In the Dickens Evening her picture is shown, as is the case in the Harrow Music Service source, I'm sure this is also the case in some of the other sources as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.138.17 (talk) 16:17, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Given that to keep this article, significant coverage about a person is needed in reliable sources, a bunch of pcitures in which the subject is not even identified falls well short of that standard. -- Whpq (talk) 16:50, 7 June 2012 (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.