- 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 draftify. Suggest getting some review via the WP:Articles for creation process before moving back to mainspace. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Georgie Smith ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non notable, article is full of linkspam, no evidence of reliable secondary coverage. - CHAMPION ( talk) ( contributions) ( logs) 11:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ( talk) ( contributions) ( logs) 11:08, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi there. I dont think this page Georgie Smith should be deleted as the credits are officially verified but i'm happy to try to improve the article. Im learning here! I have added some more reliable sources as links from the BBC and IMDB. Some of the links needed updating as the websites they linked to changed their content after a while. Im not sure what you mean by 'link-spam' (have i just added too many links to all the naems etc?) as I thought i was verifiying what certain things were by adding links to them - for example the link to the school where she trained etc - but if this is not the right thing to do, please let me know so i can learn from this advise and improve the article rather than delete it. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scoobiunderground ( talk • contribs) 01:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi, please can someone help guide me as to what i should and should not include link-wise? This article was created i think about ten years ago and the links were at the time, reliable sources as links to articles. Over the years the content of some of these websites has changed (and why i updated a link which seems to have led me here to this discussion for deletion - not my intention at all!) but the articles must still exist somewhere as they were also in print, for example the original Radio Times Magazine article (sold in all UK newsagents nationwide) for her lead role, or the link to the front cover picture etc. The comment was that i have included 'linkspam' in the article. I have not set out intentionally to do anything malicious, and if i have added links that i shouldn't have, please excuse my lack of experience. I want to correct it. So if someone with experience would be kind enough to guide me as to what links to include and what to remove so i can improve this article, i would really appreciate it. Thank you. Scoobiunderground ( talk) 01:51, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
- Issue of links addressed and sorted. Thanks to administrator for assistance. Scoobiunderground ( talk) 00:42, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947( c) ( m) 04:32, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- comment We can keep the article only if better links to reliable sources are given. So please add more reliable references and links. Keep in mind that secondary sources are needed to keep the article.-- ClrView ( talk) 10:21, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- Draft so that Scoobiunderground can improve it out of the scope of AfD. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:38, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Draftify Per Ritchie. I'm seeing some stuff that my point to notability as well. L3X1 (distænt write) 19:15, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 draftify. Suggest getting some review via the WP:Articles for creation process before moving back to mainspace. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:49, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Georgie Smith ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non notable, article is full of linkspam, no evidence of reliable secondary coverage. - CHAMPION ( talk) ( contributions) ( logs) 11:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ( talk) ( contributions) ( logs) 11:08, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:42, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi there. I dont think this page Georgie Smith should be deleted as the credits are officially verified but i'm happy to try to improve the article. Im learning here! I have added some more reliable sources as links from the BBC and IMDB. Some of the links needed updating as the websites they linked to changed their content after a while. Im not sure what you mean by 'link-spam' (have i just added too many links to all the naems etc?) as I thought i was verifiying what certain things were by adding links to them - for example the link to the school where she trained etc - but if this is not the right thing to do, please let me know so i can learn from this advise and improve the article rather than delete it. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scoobiunderground ( talk • contribs) 01:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi, please can someone help guide me as to what i should and should not include link-wise? This article was created i think about ten years ago and the links were at the time, reliable sources as links to articles. Over the years the content of some of these websites has changed (and why i updated a link which seems to have led me here to this discussion for deletion - not my intention at all!) but the articles must still exist somewhere as they were also in print, for example the original Radio Times Magazine article (sold in all UK newsagents nationwide) for her lead role, or the link to the front cover picture etc. The comment was that i have included 'linkspam' in the article. I have not set out intentionally to do anything malicious, and if i have added links that i shouldn't have, please excuse my lack of experience. I want to correct it. So if someone with experience would be kind enough to guide me as to what links to include and what to remove so i can improve this article, i would really appreciate it. Thank you. Scoobiunderground ( talk) 01:51, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
- Issue of links addressed and sorted. Thanks to administrator for assistance. Scoobiunderground ( talk) 00:42, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947( c) ( m) 04:32, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- comment We can keep the article only if better links to reliable sources are given. So please add more reliable references and links. Keep in mind that secondary sources are needed to keep the article.-- ClrView ( talk) 10:21, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- Draft so that Scoobiunderground can improve it out of the scope of AfD. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:38, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Draftify Per Ritchie. I'm seeing some stuff that my point to notability as well. L3X1 (distænt write) 19:15, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- 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.