- 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. The amount of sourcing in existence that mentions the subject's name in relation to their part in a show is irrelevant, the requirement (as noted at WP:GNG) is whether or not those sources cover the subject "directly and in detail". As no sign of this being the case has been presented by the editor requesting the article's retention, it is found that this article's subject lacks the requisite notability for inclusion in this encyclopedia. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 21:57, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Lynsay King
- Lynsay King ( | 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 actress, Found a few mentions about her role in Corrie but can't find anything substantial, As she played Sarah-Louise Platt for the past 12 years it should probably be redirected to there however I'll let the community decide, Fails NACTOR & GNG, – Davey2010 Talk 19:00, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 21:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per nom. Played the role of Sarah-Louise Platt for 12 years on Coronation Street. Odd that is being considered as a reason to AfD. There is a lot of where-are-they-now coverage on her, both is television documentaries like The Kids From Coronation Street and in print. [1] [2] [3] [4] While each article might not be extremely in-depth, a combination of all pushes way past the threshold of GNG. -- Oakshade ( talk) 03:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- "There is a lot of where-are-they-now coverage on her" - I wouldn't call
one result from The Irish Mirror alot, Having looked through the searches again only result is actually about Lynsay with
the rest of the sources being about Tina O Brien so she fails GNG (I forgot to add above but there may well be sources offline however that's a wild guess but If I were to put money on it I would say there wasn't anything much better offline either)
- NACTOR states the following: Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
- Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
- Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.
- "There is a lot of where-are-they-now coverage on her" - I wouldn't call
one result from The Irish Mirror alot, Having looked through the searches again only result is actually about Lynsay with
the rest of the sources being about Tina O Brien so she fails GNG (I forgot to add above but there may well be sources offline however that's a wild guess but If I were to put money on it I would say there wasn't anything much better offline either)
- Well A) She's not been in multiple programmes (She's been in various Corrie spinoffs but you may aswell say that's all one programme), B) She doesn't have a fan base, and C) Not entirely sure how you'd prove C ... So she actually fails NACTOR & GNG
- Ofcourse If you or anyone can find anything I'd be more than happy to withdraw but as it stands now she unfortunately fails both NACTOR and GNG. –
Davey2010
Talk
14:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
-
WP:GNG dos't make the requirement that a single source have extremely in-depth coverage, just that there is enough in-depth coverage available even if it's from a combination of multiple sources. That's why this topic passes GNG. Sometimes a person can just be notable for playing just one part, especially if the rold is very significant and spanning over a decade like in this case. Hanging on the one word "multiple" of a sub-guidline and sub-clause like WP:NACTOR is just a classic case of
WP:GAMETYPE. --
Oakshade (
talk)
06:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- But that's the point there is no in-depth coverage .... they're all just trivial mentions (One source in the article is great however the article cannot solely rely on one source), I'm not trying to
Game the system here I'm simply going by what NACTOR explicitly says, Various actresses have been deleted due to the lack of coverage and the one role and being quite honest I'm not seeing anything different here, Ofcourse I have no objections to this being redirected but as it stands they're not notable (and it's highly unlikely they ever will be). –
Davey2010
Talk
09:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- The combination of the multitude of sources makes it in-depth. And sorry, but going by what NACTOR explicitly says is just ignoring
common sense and sticking to the letter of a cherry-picked buried sub-clause whilst ignoring the principle of the guidelines as a whole which is the definition of
WP:GAMETYPE.--
Oakshade (
talk)
21:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Except there isn't a multitude of sources ... there's barely sod all, Nope I'm going by a notability guideline which is followed by everyone on every single BLP AFD, She fails NACTOR as well as GNG. –
Davey2010
Talk
22:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Actually there are a multitude of sources.
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8] which in combination equate to significant per
WP:GNG.
Just repeating "fails GNG" and willingly participating in
WP:GAMETYPE isn't going to change that.--
Oakshade (
talk)
22:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Problem is those can't be used as they're all tabloid newspapers (It does state here you can use them with caution however I've been told more than once that that shouldn't be used full stop (I believe I asked at the help desk however that could've been this year, last year) , I personally still believe she does fail NACTOR & GNG but we obviously disagree so perhaps it's best we just move on otherwise we're going to be here forever debating this :), BTW I apologise for hatting this it's just usually long dicussions do get hatted, Anyway thanks, – Davey2010 Talk 23:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Actually there are a multitude of sources.
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8] which in combination equate to significant per
WP:GNG.
Just repeating "fails GNG" and willingly participating in
WP:GAMETYPE isn't going to change that.--
Oakshade (
talk)
22:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Except there isn't a multitude of sources ... there's barely sod all, Nope I'm going by a notability guideline which is followed by everyone on every single BLP AFD, She fails NACTOR as well as GNG. –
Davey2010
Talk
22:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- The combination of the multitude of sources makes it in-depth. And sorry, but going by what NACTOR explicitly says is just ignoring
common sense and sticking to the letter of a cherry-picked buried sub-clause whilst ignoring the principle of the guidelines as a whole which is the definition of
WP:GAMETYPE.--
Oakshade (
talk)
21:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- But that's the point there is no in-depth coverage .... they're all just trivial mentions (One source in the article is great however the article cannot solely rely on one source), I'm not trying to
Game the system here I'm simply going by what NACTOR explicitly says, Various actresses have been deleted due to the lack of coverage and the one role and being quite honest I'm not seeing anything different here, Ofcourse I have no objections to this being redirected but as it stands they're not notable (and it's highly unlikely they ever will be). –
Davey2010
Talk
09:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
-
WP:GNG dos't make the requirement that a single source have extremely in-depth coverage, just that there is enough in-depth coverage available even if it's from a combination of multiple sources. That's why this topic passes GNG. Sometimes a person can just be notable for playing just one part, especially if the rold is very significant and spanning over a decade like in this case. Hanging on the one word "multiple" of a sub-guidline and sub-clause like WP:NACTOR is just a classic case of
WP:GAMETYPE. --
Oakshade (
talk)
06:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 01:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 01:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 07:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 07:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - Fails WP:NACTOR. Has played one character on television. Searches for "fans" turns up nothing to indicate a fan base. All searches for "Lynsay King" reference that she played the one character or "where is she now" type of articles mostly in tabloids. A search of the character she played "Sarah-Louise Platt " actually mentions another actor, Tina O'Brien, more frequently than the subject. Also appears to fail WP:GNG as well. Limited coverage from reliable sources, none of which address the subject in much detail. CBS527 Talk 15:20, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 15:25, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. The main role she played was a newborn, and her main qualification for that role was that she had a twin sister, so they could alternate playing the role. But, more to the point viz-a-viz WP:N, the sources just aren't there. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:28, 23 December 2016 (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 delete. The amount of sourcing in existence that mentions the subject's name in relation to their part in a show is irrelevant, the requirement (as noted at WP:GNG) is whether or not those sources cover the subject "directly and in detail". As no sign of this being the case has been presented by the editor requesting the article's retention, it is found that this article's subject lacks the requisite notability for inclusion in this encyclopedia. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 21:57, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Lynsay King
- Lynsay King ( | 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 actress, Found a few mentions about her role in Corrie but can't find anything substantial, As she played Sarah-Louise Platt for the past 12 years it should probably be redirected to there however I'll let the community decide, Fails NACTOR & GNG, – Davey2010 Talk 19:00, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 21:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per nom. Played the role of Sarah-Louise Platt for 12 years on Coronation Street. Odd that is being considered as a reason to AfD. There is a lot of where-are-they-now coverage on her, both is television documentaries like The Kids From Coronation Street and in print. [1] [2] [3] [4] While each article might not be extremely in-depth, a combination of all pushes way past the threshold of GNG. -- Oakshade ( talk) 03:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- "There is a lot of where-are-they-now coverage on her" - I wouldn't call
one result from The Irish Mirror alot, Having looked through the searches again only result is actually about Lynsay with
the rest of the sources being about Tina O Brien so she fails GNG (I forgot to add above but there may well be sources offline however that's a wild guess but If I were to put money on it I would say there wasn't anything much better offline either)
- NACTOR states the following: Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
- Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
- Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.
- "There is a lot of where-are-they-now coverage on her" - I wouldn't call
one result from The Irish Mirror alot, Having looked through the searches again only result is actually about Lynsay with
the rest of the sources being about Tina O Brien so she fails GNG (I forgot to add above but there may well be sources offline however that's a wild guess but If I were to put money on it I would say there wasn't anything much better offline either)
- Well A) She's not been in multiple programmes (She's been in various Corrie spinoffs but you may aswell say that's all one programme), B) She doesn't have a fan base, and C) Not entirely sure how you'd prove C ... So she actually fails NACTOR & GNG
- Ofcourse If you or anyone can find anything I'd be more than happy to withdraw but as it stands now she unfortunately fails both NACTOR and GNG. –
Davey2010
Talk
14:58, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
-
WP:GNG dos't make the requirement that a single source have extremely in-depth coverage, just that there is enough in-depth coverage available even if it's from a combination of multiple sources. That's why this topic passes GNG. Sometimes a person can just be notable for playing just one part, especially if the rold is very significant and spanning over a decade like in this case. Hanging on the one word "multiple" of a sub-guidline and sub-clause like WP:NACTOR is just a classic case of
WP:GAMETYPE. --
Oakshade (
talk)
06:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- But that's the point there is no in-depth coverage .... they're all just trivial mentions (One source in the article is great however the article cannot solely rely on one source), I'm not trying to
Game the system here I'm simply going by what NACTOR explicitly says, Various actresses have been deleted due to the lack of coverage and the one role and being quite honest I'm not seeing anything different here, Ofcourse I have no objections to this being redirected but as it stands they're not notable (and it's highly unlikely they ever will be). –
Davey2010
Talk
09:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- The combination of the multitude of sources makes it in-depth. And sorry, but going by what NACTOR explicitly says is just ignoring
common sense and sticking to the letter of a cherry-picked buried sub-clause whilst ignoring the principle of the guidelines as a whole which is the definition of
WP:GAMETYPE.--
Oakshade (
talk)
21:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Except there isn't a multitude of sources ... there's barely sod all, Nope I'm going by a notability guideline which is followed by everyone on every single BLP AFD, She fails NACTOR as well as GNG. –
Davey2010
Talk
22:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Actually there are a multitude of sources.
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8] which in combination equate to significant per
WP:GNG.
Just repeating "fails GNG" and willingly participating in
WP:GAMETYPE isn't going to change that.--
Oakshade (
talk)
22:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Problem is those can't be used as they're all tabloid newspapers (It does state here you can use them with caution however I've been told more than once that that shouldn't be used full stop (I believe I asked at the help desk however that could've been this year, last year) , I personally still believe she does fail NACTOR & GNG but we obviously disagree so perhaps it's best we just move on otherwise we're going to be here forever debating this :), BTW I apologise for hatting this it's just usually long dicussions do get hatted, Anyway thanks, – Davey2010 Talk 23:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Actually there are a multitude of sources.
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8] which in combination equate to significant per
WP:GNG.
Just repeating "fails GNG" and willingly participating in
WP:GAMETYPE isn't going to change that.--
Oakshade (
talk)
22:35, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Except there isn't a multitude of sources ... there's barely sod all, Nope I'm going by a notability guideline which is followed by everyone on every single BLP AFD, She fails NACTOR as well as GNG. –
Davey2010
Talk
22:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- The combination of the multitude of sources makes it in-depth. And sorry, but going by what NACTOR explicitly says is just ignoring
common sense and sticking to the letter of a cherry-picked buried sub-clause whilst ignoring the principle of the guidelines as a whole which is the definition of
WP:GAMETYPE.--
Oakshade (
talk)
21:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- But that's the point there is no in-depth coverage .... they're all just trivial mentions (One source in the article is great however the article cannot solely rely on one source), I'm not trying to
Game the system here I'm simply going by what NACTOR explicitly says, Various actresses have been deleted due to the lack of coverage and the one role and being quite honest I'm not seeing anything different here, Ofcourse I have no objections to this being redirected but as it stands they're not notable (and it's highly unlikely they ever will be). –
Davey2010
Talk
09:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
-
WP:GNG dos't make the requirement that a single source have extremely in-depth coverage, just that there is enough in-depth coverage available even if it's from a combination of multiple sources. That's why this topic passes GNG. Sometimes a person can just be notable for playing just one part, especially if the rold is very significant and spanning over a decade like in this case. Hanging on the one word "multiple" of a sub-guidline and sub-clause like WP:NACTOR is just a classic case of
WP:GAMETYPE. --
Oakshade (
talk)
06:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 01:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 01:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 07:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 07:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - Fails WP:NACTOR. Has played one character on television. Searches for "fans" turns up nothing to indicate a fan base. All searches for "Lynsay King" reference that she played the one character or "where is she now" type of articles mostly in tabloids. A search of the character she played "Sarah-Louise Platt " actually mentions another actor, Tina O'Brien, more frequently than the subject. Also appears to fail WP:GNG as well. Limited coverage from reliable sources, none of which address the subject in much detail. CBS527 Talk 15:20, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 15:25, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. The main role she played was a newborn, and her main qualification for that role was that she had a twin sister, so they could alternate playing the role. But, more to the point viz-a-viz WP:N, the sources just aren't there. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:28, 23 December 2016 (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.