Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francesca Marie Smith

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. Michig (talk) 08:33, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Francesca Marie Smith[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. This actress has only had one role of note, the voice of Helga Pataki on Hey Arnold, which is a show that had a small fanbase compared to other Nicktoons. Being the voice of Helga Pataki does not equal making unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment as per WP:NACTOR. There are very few reliable secondary sources that have any significant coverage of this actress thus failing WP:SIGCOV. Finally this article was PRODed and deleted in July 2015 with the concern being, Does not meet WP:GNG as she is not significantly covered by any reliable secondary sources. The situation has not changed since then. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 19:25, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She meets Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions not only for her role in Hey Arnold! but in other voice work as well, such as a Dr. Seuss adaptation. Perhaps draftify if the secondary source issue can't be fixed. SportingFlyer talk 19:37, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Excepting Helga Pataki, Ms. Smith has not had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. Note the "significant" in WP:NACTOR. All the other roles that Smith has had are minor and insignificant. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 19:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

She was a voice actor in every episode of the Beethoven television show, voiced the lead character in the Itsy Bitsy Spider television series and voiced the lead character in a Dr. Seuss book adaptation. On top of that, Hey Arnold! was made into a movie, and she voiced one of the main characters in that movie. There are a number of sources discussing her in relation to her role on Hey Arnold!, and she did a Reddit AMA recently apparently. It should be able to be sourced and it clearly meets WP:NACTOR. SportingFlyer talk 20:50, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are stating the first point of WP:NACTOR which states that an actor is notable if they have had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions while ignoring the other two. The second point of WP:NACTOR states states that an actor is notable if they have a large fan base or a significant "cult" following. The BeetHoven and Itsy Bitsy Spider television series are both immensely obscure and practically unknown and neither could be said to have a large fan base or a significant cult following. The third point of WP:NACTOR states states that an actor is notable if they have made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. Smith's character in Beethoven is a secondary character, not a main or significant character in the medium. While Smith may have had the lead role in Itspy Bitsy Spider, once again, that series is very obscure and voicing the lead character on a nearly unwatched show does not make the actress notable in an encyclopaedic sense. Neither of these roles could be described as unique or innovative. In fact, bringing in these roles is just a means to obfuscate the article's inherent lack of notability as per WP:MASK. You keep bringing up a supposed role in a Doctor Seuss adaption but so far you have failed to name what that adaptation is and it is not mentioned anywhere in the article. The Hey Arnold movie is a continuation of the TV Series and was in fact originally made as a special episode of the series so it should not be looked at as an independent medium from the series. A Reddit AMA (Ask Me Anything) is a WP:PRIMARY source and absolutely does not make up for the lack of reliable WP:SECONDARY sources. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 21:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have always viewed WP:NACTOR criteria inclusively, as needing to satisfy only one of the three. I also view this as a strong keep. Lots of articles talking with her about her work, for instance: [1] I think it's easily possible it could be sourced properly. SportingFlyer talk 21:51, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 00:22, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 00:22, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete has not had multiple significant roles in notable productions.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:33, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:35, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:35, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Hey Arnold! characters#Helga Pataki her only notable role that has some sort of significant coverage. [2] I don't see any other major characters, so this doesn't meet WP:ENT. The Itsy Bitsy Spider cartoon was mainly about Frank Welker voicing the spider. [3] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:38, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per the numerous major awards received documented here for her roles in Hey Arnold and The Secret World of Alex Mack. Sergecross73 msg me 20:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Passes WP:NACTOR for "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." She's had 26 roles in films, movies and video games that are significant enough to have an article on Wikipedia, including The Drew Carey Show, The Secret World of Alex Mack, Hey Arnold! (and the movies), Recess (and the movies), and Lloyd in Space. Additionally, she passes WP:ANYBIO for "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times" as she's received 6 major awards or nominations including winning the award for Best Performance in a Voice-Over – TV or Film: Young Actress at the 19th Youth in Film Awards for her role on Hey Arnold! Lonehexagon (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Lonehexagon's comment on the amount of roles Smith has had does not establish notability. The user states that She's had 26 roles in films, movies and video games that are significant enough to have an article on Wikipedia. First I would refer the user to WP:OTHERSTUFF and say that just because the media are notable doe not mean that the individual actors that worked on them are notable too. Secondly, yes she may have 26 roles in media that have Wikipedia articles but, as other users have noted, these roles were minor and insignificant compared to her only notable role as Helga Pataki. Winning a Youth in Film Award (note that they are now called the Young Artist Awards) also does not automatically establish notability. Have a look at, for example, the 38th Young Artist Awards, and see how many winners and nominees do not have an article. Obviously winning that award is not an assurance of notability. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 19:23, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You state that her roles are insignificant, but nearly all of them are named roles. I've never seen a Wikipedia guideline that says a significant award doesn't count because there were too many recipients. If it were just her Helga role, or just the award, I could see a possible question of notability, but both apply to her, and she's done dozens of other named roles in notable shows/movies, too. Lonehexagon (talk) 02:47, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just because the roles are named does not mean that they are significant. I have never said that there is a guideline an award is immaterial for having too many recipients. What I did was point out that winning that award is not necessarily an indication of notability by pointing out that many previous winners. The main problem with this article is that even after the recent WP:BOMBARDMENT there are few reliable secondary sources that provide significant information about this actress. With no sources showing an WP:INDEPTH or WP:SIGCOV this article fails WP:GNG. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 19:57, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure you can make as definitive of a statement as you're attempting to make here. We get it. You don't think the roles or awards are significant. But you're treading on extremely subjective grounds. You're free to your opinion, but your argument doesn't discount the keep !votes by any means. It's plenty reasonable to find it to be significant to win multiple notable awards for multiple different roles. Sergecross73 msg me 04:11, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:ONUS is on you to prove that the roles or awards are significant and all you've done so far is WP:ASSERTN that winning the award means the subject is notable. All this article consists of is a list of roles and award nominations: that is not an encyclopedia article and Wikipedia is not IMDB. Even after the recent WP:BOMBARDMENT, the article has few sources and those it does have fail to meet WP:INDEPTH, WP:SIGCOV or WP:SUSTAINED. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 19:57, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's been done, though. She has had multiple significant named roles in multiple notable movies or television shows. The discrepancy here is you don't think anything she's done is significant, with the possible exception of her Hey Arnold! work (which actually possibly gets her past WP:NACTOR on her own as it was both a television show and a movie x2), whereas the rest of us Keep votes do. SportingFlyer talk 01:53, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's nonsense - my argument has already been proven. The subject has won notable awards, multiple times, for multiple different roles. That's a valid claim to having multiple significant roles. All you've done is given a vague, subjective "Eh well it's not good enough for me though, I don't think it's significant" - it's neither possible or necessary to counter that sort of argument. You can respond that to literally anything. You're setting the bar too high. Sergecross73 msg me 04:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:55, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I believe that Francesca Marie Smith's filmography is prolific enough in notable media for a Wikipedia article to be more than warranted for Smith. She has several award nominations/wins as well from established entities such as the Youth in Film Awards. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 07:18, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Notice should be paid towards the numerous awards and nominations that Francesca Smith has received, per WP:ANYBIO. Several of the awards are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia pages, so I'd hesitate to gloss over them in AFD; even if her filmography itself isn't suitable for establishing notability, the awards she's received for it might be. FlotillaFlotsam (talk) 06:32, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep has multiple prominent roles and a number of notable awards, passes WP:NACTOR at least criteria 1 and only one criteria is needed Atlantic306 (talk) 18:14, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Per WP:NACTOR. Prolific filmography. BabbaQ (talk) 08:56, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And that's all this article is; a filmography. That still doesn't mean that the subject passes WP:NACTOR. How is this actress individually notable? -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 20:32, 15 March 2018 (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.