Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hilda Plowright

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. Consensus is that the improved article shows that they meet the notability guidelines. Davewild (talk) 08:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hilda Plowright[edit]

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

Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Nearly all of her film appearances are uncredited. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:36, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Only reference is IMDB, minor actress with no notable coverage. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:33, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Multiple searches (News, Newspapers Archive, highbeam and thefreelibrary) all found nothing aside from a few results from Books. Not a particularly notable actress with only minor roles (nurse, villager, etc.) through the years and no significant or break-through ones. SwisterTwister talk 17:55, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Actress from the "golden age" of Hollywood, dozens and dozens of roles, if minor, in significant films. Adequate sources to meet WP:GNG. However, article itself stinks and is inaccurate. ~~Will fix~~ Have expended and sourced properly. Montanabw ^(talk) 16:35, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:02, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:02, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Rather misleading filmography, don't you think? Seeing as only a few films are explicitly listed as uncredited, whereas she was only credited in four of them: Partners of the Plains, Raffles, Summer Magic and 36 Hours. Also, cast listings aren't very useful for satisfying GNG. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:43, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by "misleading": Pulled several off her bio in the New York Times, which didn't designate roles as credited or uncredited...found only two where the word "uncredited" appeared, elsewhere, and noted those. (IMdb either is or is not "reliable" - I've heard both - ?) Clearly she was a character actor who played many small bit parts - old lady, librarian, nurse, maid, etc... but frankly, to make a living acting for 30+ years when she was cast as "older" from the outset is pretty impressive by itself. I expanded the article to address the "only reference is IMdb" concern you raised. Seems adequate to me. I'll keep digging around to see if I can find more. I'm finding this a rather interesting project. Montanabw ^(talk) 04:55, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First off, that's not a New York Times article, just its mirror of AllMovie (note the copyright at the bottom). IMDb is almost always reliable as to credits and "uncredits", based on the many movies I've watched, but not for bios or trivia. Quantity (lots of bit parts) doesn't equal quality/notability/satisfying WP:NACTOR. That criterion's been stretched a bit for actors who have lots of credited roles, but that's about it in my experience. And as I've stated before, cast listings are useless for GNG. While she does appear to have a decent stage career according to IBDb,[1] all I can find that's not just a cast listing is one line about her in a 1937 Brooklyn Daily Eagle review of the Broadway play And Now Good-bye: "Hilda Plowright, as the clergyman's wife, turns in an excellent example of the woman who is completely exasperating without meaning to be anything but pleasant." Clarityfiend (talk) 07:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't know how many bit actors have as long a filmography or as many credits as she has, I'm finding her quite interesting. I don't know if anyone has accumulated such lists and I can't engage in OR or SYNTH to do so, but seems to me she's meeting a minimum threshold. Her librarian character in The Philadelphia Story is mentioned in a couple different books. I mean seriously, she does top Lawnchair Larry or some Cricket player in Manchester who played one season in 1979 or something. Where we are looking at people who could be forgotten by history yet really were rather remarkable, I think the wiki can handle the bandwidth of keeping this one. Montanabw ^(talk) 17:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the job of an encyclopedia to generate notability, only to record it. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:21, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, upon reviewing her filmography, I think she is notable. I also think that WP needs to address its problems with systemic bias and this is a particularly good example - an older, rather plain-looking woman who made a living in film by not being a porn star. Perfect! Montanabw ^(talk) 16:42, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

She didn't reach Hollywood until 1938 when she was 48. Even on Broadway she was 35 and over. At 26 she was successfully playing the lead in romantic comedy. Looks as if she was born too soon and went to Hollywood far, far too late. But she did pretty well all the same! Thincat (talk) 10:36, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. To make such a living with so many roles in a world that valued youth and beauty, she did extraordinarily well! Montanabw ^(talk) 02:54, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Appearing (credited!) in many Broadway plays in named roles is in itself enough for me. There would have been plenty of coverage at the time even if we can't find it online now. I know WP:NACTOR does not say this counts but our guidelines are not perfect and that is why they say that exceptions exist. Thincat (talk) 17:09, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:28, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is what I could find with Newspapers.com [[2]]. The others were just mentions of her being in various cast lists. Cowlibob (talk) 04:58, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, thank you. I've found 32 references to her in the British provincial press (paywalled). Some merely mention her name. I've thrown into the article a complete (complete, until it tails of into extraneous matters!) review of her in a title role (the review is long out of copyright). I'm not saying all this should be in the article but it shows what was being written at the time. Thincat (talk) 09:10, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(I wish I could stop looking into this!). I suspect she was a really good actor. I've found a newpaper that lists her along with only two others (Harvey Clark and Russell Hayden) in Partners of the Plains. But, oh dear, as "Aunt Martha". That's not the way to the Hollywood Walk of Fame. Thincat (talk) 11:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:41, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Voting keep twice!~~Mild rant: Article has been significantly expanded since original AfD, notability is now clearly established....why relist? Montanabw ^(talk) 05:45, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Struck duplicate !vote, only one allowed, but feel free to comment all you'd like. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:32, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notability is not just about the amount of coverage you can find, but the quality of the information. I have searched on line and find numerous books that confirm the information that is now on the file. She had over 60 film credits, but those credits, while they might be for non-starring roles were with major stars and directors. Cary Grant and Joan Fontaine in "Suspicion" directed by Alfred Hitchcock; Norma Scherer, Rosalind Russell and Joan Crawford in the "Women" direction of George Cukor; Betty Davis and Claude Raines in "Now Voyager"; Rita Hayworth and Burt Lancaster in Separate Tables; Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn under the direction of George Cukor in "Philadelphia Story". Is it remotely logical she would repeatedly be hired to work with major stars if she was not skilled? Is it remotely logical that the likes of Hitchcock or Cukor, would hire her? The facts of her longevity in a notoriously fickle industry and that she has many, many credit with major figures speaks to her notability. Everyone is not a star, but stars would not exist without the other cast, unseen cameramen, editors, etc. that go to building the star's fame. Those contributions matter, IMO. At the very least, she meets GNG, multiple secondary sources confirm her longevity and skill. SusunW (talk) 01:08, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as Notability has been established. --Rosiestep (talk) 01:18, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Now well-sourced. Notability established through well-accepted sources. —Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 01:33, 31 May 2015 (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.