Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ragnhild Michelsen

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. ✗plicit 11:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ragnhild Michelsen[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)

Fails WP:NACTOR, WP:BASIC, and WP:ANYBIO. To the best of my ability to find films she was in, she does not appear to have lead or otherwise significant roles in multiple notable films. She also does not appear to have received WP:SIGCOV that I could find (and none exist in articles on the various Scandanavian Wikipedias that have her article on it). As a result, I propose that this article be deleted for failing to be notable. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:36, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per WP:HEY, very notable. Geschichte (talk) 08:49, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:59, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article has improved a lot since this AfD and coverage seems to pass. RoseCherry64 (talk) 11:17, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 11:36, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, clearly notable; I'm honestly not sure how the original nominator missed that on a google search. Yitz (talk) 21:07, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep after some good work by Geschichte.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:26, 8 December 2021 (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.