Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Wren

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 redirect to Summer in Transylvania. J04n(talk page) 03:22, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Wren

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Could not find significant coverage in reliable sources for this actress. /ƒETCH COMMS / 19:00, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:34, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete: No assertion of notability. Ravenswing 05:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The "assertion of notability" is that she is an actress. So the one-sentence article does indeed have an assertion of notability. It fails to include that she was Diana in 1 episode of Genie in the House, Chloe in 13 episodes of Life Bites, Heidi in 4 episodes of Summer in Transylvania, and Kelly Oswald in 1 episode of Casualty... or that while acting, she also held the non-acting position of costume supervisor in 10 episodes of Wiener & Wiener.[1] However, and though she might be ticking at WP:ENT, I do not see the relibale sources upon which to build a decent BLP. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Being an actor is not an assertion of notability. It's an assertion that you're an actor. There is nothing prima facie notable about the profession. Ravenswing 22:53, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response Pardon, but I've read the brief article and the speedy criteria of {{db-person}} (a lower standard than notability) and believe you are incorrect to declare a (sic) "Speedy Delete: No assertion of notability". Had the article only said "Amy Wren is an actress", without any grounds or information for further consideration, then we might reasonably conclude that a bare statement that she is an actress does not imply or assert a notability. However, as the article's full text actually states (sic) "Amy Wren plays 'Heidi' the zombie in Summer in Transylvania", and sources that statement, we have an extreme stub article that has her role as 'Heidi' in Summer in Transylvania as its credible asertion of notability. Simple. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that word doesn't mean what you think it means, Vizzini ... to assert something, you actually do have to assert it; it can't be inferred from another statement. So she plays a role in a show. Terrific; what does that assert save that, well, she plays a role in a show? Nothing at all. Were the article to say "Amy Wren is most notable for playing the role of Heidi the Zombie etc," that is an assertion of notability. It doesn't. Ravenswing 07:37, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The horse must be in front of the cart, Fezzik. CSD has a lower standard than does notability, and in a stub a simple credible statememnt of acting a specific role in a specific film is a credible assertion. Whether it passes WP:N or not is a whole different kettle of fish. IE: A stub article might read only "Sylvester Stallone plays Rocky the boxer in the film Rocky," THAT acts as a credible asertion of notability. A stub does NOT need to say "notable for" or "known for". It is when we look to WP:N that we decide if the credible assertion is notable or not. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:10, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now per WP:TOOSOON. Redirect as a reasonable search term to Summer in Transylvania where she is already mentioned. While the article's reporting her as being Heidi in Summer in Transylvania is a sourced assertion of notability, and while her roles in multiple productions might nudge at WP:ENT, I did not find enough coverage in reliable sources upon which to build a suitable BLP article.[2][3][4][5] Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:26, 26 February 2011 (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.