Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Grant (American actress)

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. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:22, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rebecca Grant (American actress)

[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)

Doesn't meet GNG Nswix (talk) 18:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as it stands the article does not have sufficient refs to establish WP:ENT or WP:GNG. - Ahunt (talk) 18:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 18:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete she only appears to have had one-off or bit parts, based on what I read in IMdB. A pole dancer, sports reporter, celebrity interviewer and various other one shot appearances (though she did have two appearances on an Auto Trader program). I can't find sourcing confirming she was in Robot Wars as the article says. A few brief mentions of her, social media accounts, her linkedin, then we learn about her astonomical signs, and it's all pretty much useless fluff after that. Oaktree b (talk) 19:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

She was in a movie called the Sex Trip, but the VPN won't let me load a search for it here in the office, for obvious reasons, so I can't comment how notable either the film or her role in it, are. Oaktree b (talk) 19:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Several pages on Wikipedia exist to catalogue publicly-known-but-mostly-unnotable individuals who have contributed to a specific organization or such without achieving any major initial accomplishment or through offering itself as a sufficiently notable figure worthy of an encyclopedic entry. In the bigger picture, many of these pages are alright by the measurement of possible future notability (though that isn't a measurement accepted by Wikipedia). As it currently stands, this page is a perfect fit under that sub-category. And as it currently stands, I find it remarkably difficult to justify keeping this page. Indeed, no filmography database has turned up anything substantial for me either, nor do even the parts filled/accomplishments listed seem very worthy of listing (and certainly nothing lends itself to a headlining role). There are some short articles for deletion which, no doubt, should be deleted (at this time Miracle (2019 film) and The End of Quantum Reality come to mind). On the surface, appear insufficient despite their length but really fail to offer any depth whatsoever. This appears to be an odd mix of both - neither quality nor quantity either within the page nor within external sources - and as someone failing to verify the qualities of this page, I can't help but consider it a great candidate for deletion as well. Anyone else? ^^ TheMysteriousShadeheart (talk) 22:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:49, 13 January 2023 (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.