Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Tucker (singer) (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. Albeit a weak one, as all keepers state. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Tucker (singer)[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Fails WP:NSINGER and WP:NACTOR. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, Television, and California. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 02:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep as has a staff written bio at AllMusic here which includes post-Idol credits such as duetting with Dionne Warwick and a 2020 release. Haven't done a full source search yet, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 23:48, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per WP:BASIC - with the source found by Atlantic306 and coverage I found and added to the article about her on the American Idols Live! Tour 2006, as well as other sources I added, there is sustained and secondary coverage of her and her career in independent and reliable sources, including 2000 coverage of her role as young Nala in a Pantages Theatre production of The Lion King musical. Beccaynr (talk) 04:02, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: sources already found demonstrate that the subject passes WP:GNG: not the greatest sources, perhaps, but fine for the standard and seem to be WP:SIGCOV enough (that is, more than a trivial mention). UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2023 (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.