Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Melinda Hill (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 no consensus (WP:NPASR). King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Melinda Hill[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)

Prior article on this person was deleted for failing notability criteria. The poster has simply re-created it without addressing the notability issues. It should therefore be deleted immediately. Dkendr (talk) 01:20, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Melinda Hill belongs on Wikipedia and has abundant credits to support that. The article is cited substantially. I will add sections and otherwise do whatever work I can to make it stronger. But I feel her presence here is merited and important for the broader audience, for comedy, and for women in comedy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poppydownsinternational (talk • contribs) 21:07, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

She clearly merits an article and there seem to be enough cited sources here to meet the notability requirement. Like many new pages, it could use improvement, but shouldn't be up for deletion. Per the guidelines: "Remember that deletion is a last resort. Deletion nominations rarely improve articles, and deletion should not be used as a way to improve an article, or a reaction to a bad article. It is appropriate for articles which cannot be improved." Deletion is not appropriate here. StaceyEOB (talk) 21:30, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent point @StaceyEOB - the prior resolution was actually "move to draft." By the poster's admission the article isn't ready for prime time so Move to Draft again might be a better option. Dkendr (talk) 18:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 02:50, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 02:50, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 02:50, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 02:50, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. J 947 ^{^{^(c)}}, at 02:50, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:18, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TonyBallioni (talk) 16:29, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As with first AfD, the sourcing seems minor, the best of the lot is the LA Weekly story about a pilot for a comedy series, that apparently never happened. She is an actual comedian, but notability appears to have never happened, at least, not yet. If anyone manages to source it up to speed, feel free to ping me to reconsider.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:11, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep The article needs development. The subject appears to be notable Lubbad85 (talk) 20:20, 25 March 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.