Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Taheny

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. Black Kite (t) (c) 13:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Taheny[edit]

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

No evidence of notability. The only reference is to an IMDb page which gives a cast list which includes her name, and that is all. A Google search produces Facebook, taheny.com, Wikipedia, www.fanmail.biz, MySpace, a download site offerering an mp3, etc, but very little that can be considered significant independent coverage. JamesBWatson (talk) 07:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well instead of deleting this article help me make it bigger instead of making me do it all. GuineaPigWarrior 17:30, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He stated that he was unable to find much significant coverage, which is required to support any article - why would he help an article that he feels should be deleted anyway? I was unable to find anything to support either, so delete. Rehevkor ✉ 14:38, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a question of making the article bigger, it is a question of showing that the subject of the article is notable. I suggest reading Wikipedia's general notability guideline and guideline on notability of people to see what is needed. 79.123.78.215 (talk) 20:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Actress & award-winning-comedian's carreer appears to meet WP:ENT's "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions," as she has indeed had significant roles in multiple notable television shows, and stage performances, even if notable "only" in Australia. Unknown in the United States is no cause for deletion, as she and her notable shows appear to be notable in Austrailia... and notable in Australia is notable enough for en.Wikipedia. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The most convincing reason to keep is the part of the filmography which says Comedy Inc. (95 episodes, 2003-2007) (TV) Dream Focus 09:39, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets WP:ENT. -Reconsider ! 12:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets notability requirements for entertainers. SnottyWong talk 23:09, 21 May 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.