Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mia Park

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. postdlf (talk) 23:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mia Park[edit]

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

Reason Listed as an actress and musician on Wikipedia, wondering about the notability of acting performances. Doesn't seem the meet the evidence for WP:MUSIC,WP:NACTOR? Cannot find any information about the bands online. Some of the supporting articles seem self-promotional (website of her own theater company, personal website). Banchasana (talk) 05:44, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:30, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:31, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Subject-specific notability criteria do not override the general ones, and Park has been the subject of profiles in newspapers, magazines and printed books (as cited), chiefly but not exclusively in relation to her work as host of Chic-A-Go-Go. Speaking as the creator, I would not have added this article were I not confident that it cleared WP:GNG and WP:BIO by a wide margin. Further, judging from the numerous incoming redlinks, I was not the first to come to that conclusion. If this is deleted, I would like clarification on one point: how many non-trivial treatments in independent secondary sources would be needed for it to be kept? -- Visviva (talk) 20:32, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:33, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Meets the General notability guideline as host of a ~~broadcast~~ TV show for 15 years, and there is no need to invoke narrower actor or musician guidelines, as those fields are not her primary claim to notability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation about general/subject-specific guidelines. I was confused because her page is tagged with actor/musician labels - the actor/musician information on the page seemed more promotional. To clarify: the show she hosted (which has a Wikipedia entry) is a community access TV show, not a broadcast TV show. Banchasana (talk) 20:19, 5 August 2013 (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.