Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laura Boddington

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. czar 22:19, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Boddington[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Boddington has not had multiple significant roles in notable productions. Beyond this the article falls far short of the general notability guidelines, with only one source, IMDb, which is not reliable and aims tocover people regardless of any consideration of notability. A search on Google did not find anything even close to a reliable source. John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as only very minor and uncredited roles so clearly does not pass WP:NACTOR at this time. At least two significant roles in notable productions are needed to produce significant coverage in WP:Reliable sources, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Dead like me is her only material role and could (but not for certain) meet one "significant role" in NACTOR. There is nothing else. Almost nothing in to pass under WP:GNG (bar references to her role in Dead like me). Britishfinance (talk) 21:11, 19 February 2019 (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.