Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lauren Lakis (2nd nomination)

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 and improve. Consensus is that the subject is notable due to coverage in multiple reliable sources. Several such sources have been provided in this discussion and can be used to improve and flesh out the article. (Note: IMDb is not generally considered a reliable source, as it is a user-created website much like Wikipedia.) Aervanath (talk) 16:21, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lauren Lakis[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)

This article is one on a living person lakcing any reliable sources. My search for reliable sources just turned up things like an instagram account, nothing substantial or reliable. She seems to have only had one even marginally significant role in a productions that is at best borderline notable. There is no way to interpret the notability guidelines for actresses that they would be broad enough to include Lakis John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 16:26, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The Google links automatically added to the AFD show quite a bit more than "an instagram account" : Wonderland Magazine, Vanyaland, Earmilk, Atwood Magazine, and Buzzbands.la. I'm not sure if any of these are reliable sources, but the nomination statement is misleading. pburka (talk) 16:55, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderland and Earmilk both appear to be reliable sources, and the articles linked by Pburka definitely qualify as significant coverage. Cbl62 (talk) 17:36, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I re-created the Lauren Lakis article and also created an article about the movie Confessions of a Teenage Jesus Jerk in which Lauren Lakis performed, back in May 2020. At the time, I reviewed the AFD in 2012 which had removed the previous Lauren Lakis article, and I noted in an edit summary that she had gone on to do much more beyond what would have been covered in the previous article. I did not have the previous article, and would like for an administrator with access to it to assess it and transfer any usable material and sources from it to this one. But even without that, it struck me that she appeared to be up-and-coming and headed for wider success, and I assessed that this person already is a significant actor about whom there is sufficient coverage to meet Wikipedia notability requirements, and saw that she is also a songwriter and singer which would add to her wiki-notability. --Doncram (talk) 18:31, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I believe that IMDB is a reliable source for what roles an actor has taken. The IMDB page about her lists 52 credits, which seems like quite a lot. Yes, the majority are in short films or may be single or multiple appearances (which count as just one of the 52 credits) in TV series. These include one appearance in major series Big Little Lies, one appearance in major series Homecoming and appearances in all four episodes of a French-language series Twice Upon a Time). As for movies I saw her significant role in "Confessions" and I see she has a role in February 2020-released movie I'll Be Around, which is available in Amazon Prime. I haven't/can't assess the significance of each individual role, but I do think the multiple credits add up in establishing this is a significant person.

I don't often start or develop articles about actors or participate often in AFDs about actors. But I believe I have a decent record, due to my selectively participating where significance seems clear to me. FWIW, when the Wikipedia article on comparable young actor Jennifer Lawrence (a rather major star now) was up for deletion in a mass-deletion process, it would definitely have been deleted except for the fact that I took action and saved it. That's one save for Wikipedia's record of egg-in-the-face deletions. --Doncram (talk) 18:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I see that one of wp:SINGER's criteria for wiki-notability of a singer is: "Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable)." Lakis has at least one full album out, on Cavity Search Records. --Doncram (talk) 19:21, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Further, the "Wonderland" source mentioned above is a review of a song of hers in 2020. And this 2020 interview of her in The Vinyl District (currently a redlink but searching on "Vinyl District" in Wikipedia indicates hundreds of references to it, and this magazine or whatever should get an article) discloses that a second album is in production / coming out soon, which I believe will bring this article up to formally meeting wp:SINGER's criterion. It doesn't make sense to delete this just before it would be "legal" for sure in a few months time. Again, I think this person is notable for a combo of partial achievements along SINGER and NACTOR criteria already. --Doncram (talk) 03:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete IMDB is not reliable is any circumstance and can't be used to verify notability. Fails WP:NBAND and WP:SIGCOV for want of criteria. The coverage offered above has all been generated as part of albums release in August. However, it is failed to bite and not made any headway. Also there is no social media coverage that you can point too. So not a muscian yet. Looks at the film, she had quite a career, but mostly as a bit-part actor with some attempts at pilots but not much. Fails WP:NACTOR. No indication of significance. scope_creep^Talk 11:53, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added above about a 2nd album coming that brings Lakis to fully meeting SINGER criteria. She also has contributing significance from acting, which adds up, IMO.

I get that writing in an AFD or on Talk pages in general doesn't need to achieve perfection, but I simply do not understand much of User:scope creep's statement. For example "IMDB is reliable is any circumstance and can't be used to verify notability" is not a grammatical sentence. And if it is meaning to say that IMDB is unreliable for what roles an actor has played (which is what I relied upon it to assert above), I disagree. Complaining about the portions of IMDB where a person can contribute text about themselves is completely irrelevant. Besides the incomprehensibility of the writing, I think the intended assertions/content in this !vote are incorrect or irrelevant and that this opinion should be disregarded in closure of this AFD. Unless User:scope creep comes back and clarifies what they mean to say, and how it is relevant and what evidence supports it. --Doncram (talk) 03:57, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar mistake. IMDB is not reliable. Ive updated the comment. 08:46, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

The article has no effective sources, so adding extra albums isn't going to cut it. Only references matter. scope_creep^Talk 08:48, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for coming back and clarifying, though now I don't know what you mean by "effective sources". The existence of reliable sources has been pointed out already, and the interview in Vinyl District is another one, and these suffice. The references do not have to be added to the article for this to be properly closed "Keep". --Doncram (talk) 19:22, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is not a reliable source, but, as far as credits and awards go, it's usually pretty accurate and comprehensive, at least for works in English. It's the first place I always look when evaluating an actor, director or scriptwriter, and, if one finds roles that appear to be significant, it's usually fairly easy to verify them in more reliable sources. Also, Doncram is correct that sources need not be in the article for a topic to be deemed notable. See WP:NEXIST. pburka (talk) 20:44, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Among other problems IMBd has been known to merge more than one person under the same article. In at least one case it listed someone as appearing in a film before their birth.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not really my subject of expertise, but I found this, this, this, this and this (confirming a TV appearance outside IMDB) in a Google News search, so it should be possible for somebody to improve this. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:06, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:42, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:45, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:GNG with significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Cbl62 (talk) 14:56, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Andrew nyr (talk, contribs) 05:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As Ritchie and others have pointed out, there are multiple sources. I looked over each one and at least two or three are reliable and independent. The article does not include these sources but that's why a BEFORE is required. Lauren passes GNG.--Tsistunagiska (talk) 12:11, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Plenty of reliable sources exist, so a major premise of the nomination isn't really true. I'm not convinced that it meets WP:SINGER, but it probably will in the future. Even if it doesn't, it still meets WP:GNG per Ritchie333. Scorpions13256 (talk) 16:55, 28 October 2020 (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.