Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicole Rubio
Appearance
- 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. Randykitty (talk) 16:05, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Nicole Rubio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NACTOR. Material is sourced to a tweet and a junk publication. Can't find better mentions of this person in RS. — JFG talk 11:00, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:26, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:26, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:26, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- KEEP (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nicole_Rubio and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Actors_and_filmmakers#/editor/T-1), for multiple reasons:
- Nicole Rubio mainly* is active as Category:American television producers, Category:Women television producers, Category:American script supervisors. yearsactive 1990–present.
- * Her works include among others 2005-2016 Grey's Anatomy (TV Series) (script supervisor - 214 episodes), 2005 Sleeper Cell (TV Series) (script supervisor - 4 episodes), 2001 Training Day (script supervisor - as Nicole Cummins), 1998 Blade (script supervisor - as Nicole Cummins), among others.
- Miscellaneous Crew (19 credits);
- Director (16 credits);
- Self (1 credit);
- Actress (4 credits), among them Grey's Anatomy (TV Series) 37 episodes, 2007-2009 Monk (TV Series) 2 episodes;
- Archive footage (2 credits).
- Nicole Rubio has been categorized, among others, Category:American television actresses, Category:American film actresses, Category:American television producers, Category:Women television producers, Category:American script supervisors.
- Google statistics:
- hence, notability given without any doubts, 84.254.89.150 (talk) 22:34, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- On Wikipedia, notability is demonstrated by
significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.
Nothing you mentioned qualifies. In particular, you can't refer to user-generated content (IMDB) or to the rest of Wikipedia (categories or links) as indicators of notability. See WP:IRS for details on our sourcing policy. — JFG talk 01:51, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- On Wikipedia, notability is demonstrated by
- Keep, as above mentioned, notability given, and btw: to add further references instead of starting deletion requests imho should be our primal goal when a biography is widely covered by numerous Gxxle hits, bye, Roland zh (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
- Roland zh is the creator of and main contributor to the contested article. -The Gnome (talk) 15:50, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The arguments given by the IP (and on which Roland zh appears to have based their !vote) are invalid. IMDb is not a reliable source, categorization and links on WP do not mean anything, and GHits only suggest that there are perhaps good sources out there, nothing else. So for the moment that only leaves the nom as a policy-based argument, hence the relist to obtain perhaps some more policy-based !votes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:58, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Relisting comment: The arguments given by the IP (and on which Roland zh appears to have based their !vote) are invalid. IMDb is not a reliable source, categorization and links on WP do not mean anything, and GHits only suggest that there are perhaps good sources out there, nothing else. So for the moment that only leaves the nom as a policy-based argument, hence the relist to obtain perhaps some more policy-based !votes.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 15:58, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
- Weak Keep It appears that the subject of this article could be assessed against WP:CREATIVE, as well as or instead of WP:NACTOR. I have added a few references. I would say that it seems she has played a significant role in creating Grey's Anatomy, but whether it would be considered a major role, I don't know. That is so far her largest contribution, from the pilot episodes on. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:58, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- Delete - based solely on policy arguments, searches indicate that they do not meet WP:GNG, and they meet neither WP:NACTOR or WP:CREATIVE.Onel5969 TT me 18:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Delete on account of subject failing both WP:CREATIVE and WP:NACTOR. More explicitly, as to the former criterion, there is no significant, source-based evidence out there that she is
regarded as an important figure, widely cited by peers or successors, known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique
. She "directed episodes" of Grey's Anatomy; she has notcreated nor played a major role in co-creating
this admittedlywell-known work
. And as to the latter criterion, she has not hadsignificant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions
, nor does she have any kind ofa large fan base or a significant "cult" following
. We may be fans of her work but Wikipedia is neither a film journal nor some indiscriminate listing of information. -The Gnome (talk) 15:50, 27 December 2018 (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.