Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eunice Anderson

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. She barely fails WP:GNG because the AllBusiness source is not quite independent, and barely fails WP:ENT because the roles are just not significant enough. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eunice Anderson[edit]

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

Does not appear to be notable. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:11, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 05:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Actress played a starring role in an episode of Louie (TV series) and it appears she has been a part of older films and t.v shows. Definitely meets the minimum threshold for notability. Add some third party sources to secure verifiability requirement. Eunice Anderson, who is a senior and has been in the business for a long time, and the agents just gobbled her up.. Wikifan^{Be nice} 02:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Matthew Thompson ^{talk to me bro!} 04:36, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Starring in a single TV episode is not sufficient to establish notability. Pburka (talk) 17:12, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not Notable. Bazj (talk) 18:51, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
keep - im not sure why people are saying she only stared in one tv episode her imdb listing is huge and not even complete. shes quite notable as Wikifan said Bouket (talk) 03:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I note that only one of her credits on IMDB has both a first and last name, and that character appeared in a single episode of Law & Order. Most of her credits have no name at all (e.g. Grandma, Woman, Neighbor). This suggests that she is primarily a supporting actress and is less likely to meet the notability guidelines. Pburka (talk) 23:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete A quote from someone effectively acting as her agent that she's gotten a lot of business is not entirely an independent source. At least [1] and [2] suggest she's an actress and are cleanly independent. But more importantly, I do not see " significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" (that quote isn't large enough to my mind to be signficant), "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions", (single episode appearances are rarely signficant), "a large fan base or a significant "cult" following", nor "unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.". I'm willing to change my mind with sources that actually back up any one of these four claims, but remember that notability and verifiability are not isolated concepts, that instead, notability requires verifiable evidence. --joe decker ^{talk to me} 19:16, 26 September 2011 (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.