Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tracy Douglas

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 delete. Borderline WP:SNOW, at that. BD2412 T 04:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tracy Douglas[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)

A non notable actor. WP:BEFORE shows no evidence of reliable secondary sources Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, a search returns no RS. Caro7200 (talk) 12:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I have found no reliable significant mentions. Only user generated trivial mentions. Less Unless (talk) 11:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a non-notable actress.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reliable sources Barrettsprivateers (talk) 05:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: Of the sources I have gone through so far at newspapers.com, I have found some non-trivial coverage in a few articles about a TV guest appearance in 1993—essentially describing the subject's role as "pivotal", and other comments in this vein—but, combined with a weak WP:NACTOR argument (only one significant role), I don't think the relevant notability standards are quite met. Dflaw4 (talk) 13:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This is WP:TOOSOON; she only has one significant role so doesn't yet qualify under WP:NACTOR, and she doesn't qualify under WP:GNG either. If she gets more significant roles, then she may become notable. Ikjbagl (talk) 04:19, 14 May 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.