Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thelma Darkings

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 speedy keep. The consensus to keep has been clearly established as there are reliable sources discussing subject of article sufficient enough to scale WP:GNG. No other contrary !vote or rationale, save for the nom can be observed hence this is going to be speedy kept. (non-admin closure) Celestina007 22:45, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thelma Darkings[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)

I requested to delete this article because seems like can't pass the GNG or WP:AnyBio. Feloniii (talk) 18:56, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment AfD was malformed and not transcluded, which has just been fixed Danski454 (talk) 19:53, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 20:11, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 20:11, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Costa Rica-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 20:11, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article has references with coverage in Costa Rican newspapers like La Nación and La Prensa Libre. The nominator does not explain why these Spanish-language sources don't contribute to GNG. Is it because they're not in English? — Toughpigs (talk) 20:22, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Toughpigs: Unfortunately according to wp:BIO she is not notable and at this vase only sources are not enough. Feloniii (talk) 15:01, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Feloniii[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:44, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Plenty of coverage in apparently RS. PamD 08:39, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We have million of actress but all of them are not notable, only sources not enough, according to wp:BIO, she is definitely is not notable. Feloniii (talk) 14:52, 31 July 2020 (UTC)Feloniii[reply]
Speedy Keep Clearly notable based on cited RS in Spanish. Per WP:GNG "Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media, and in any language." La Prensa Libre calls her "la reconocida presentadora de televisión y actriz" (the renowned television presenter and actress). This is one of three AfDs on notable women just filed by the nominator. The other two are Keren Bergman (Charles Batchelor Professor at Columbia University but "Sources seems like can't verify the notability of the article") and Guadalupe Urbina("It's seems like can't pass the wikipedia:BIO') HouseOfChange (talk) 14:58, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
speedy keep i'm not sure the nom actually read the article. Praxidicae (talk) 15:26, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Bad nomination, the subject of the article is obviously notable based on sigcov in RS. Easily passes WP:GNG Netherzone (talk) 15:56, 31 July 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.