Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Bandur

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The result was Withdrawn Someone sourced the article when I wasn't looking. Where were all those sources when I googled? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 04:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maggie Bandur

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

No reliable sources found. Article consists of two sentences and a very short list, only source cited is IMDb. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The article is based in reliable sources found rather quickly. It is credited in a number of wikipedia articles, therefore I concluded she is reasonably visible (see credits), so I made a quick stub. But I will not cry over it, if nobody wants to waste their time to make a better article. - Altenmann >t 02:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What reliable sources? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What facts do you question? If you question imdb as source, I may waste more of my time and dig closer ones, like I've just added, jst for fun of bickering, but really??? Like I said, I will not cry over it and not waste any more time here: no my domain. - Altenmann >t 02:10, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article. IMDb is not a reliable source, and beyond that I can't find anything that verifies the content, from her writers' credits to Jeopardy! win. Even so, I fail to see how she meets the notability guidelines if there are no reliable, third-party sources written primarily about her. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bah, that's an easy one. You are picking something from your hat, I can do the same: Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals say: "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work". I dare say that Malcolm in the Middle is rather well known among american teenagers, who work hard on wikipedia, both contributing and vandalizing. - Altenmann >t 02:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simply working for a notable work isn't a 100% free pass for notability; that says she "may" be notable for her work on a major show, not "is automatically notable." She still has to meet the general notability guideline; and given the lack of sources, she clearly doesn't. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

She has to meet nothing but the specifically tailored guideline, and even not necessarily so: it is a guideline, not a policy. She is an immediate creator (writer) of notable works of art. That she is herself is not notable, defies any common sense. - Altenmann >t 02:43, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Jeopardy says that she was a contestant on Jeopardy. See this. -- Eastmain (talk) 02:46, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You really think that's gonna cut it? J! Archive is a fansite. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:47, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fan or not, it is a serious enterprize. Any reasons to consider it non-reliable? - Altenmann >t 03:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"I love the J-Archive. I consider it the highest pinnacle of the Internet and, frankly, of western civilization", - Ken Jennings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altenmann (talk • contribs) 03:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's a fansite put together by fans? Fansites are only allowed if someone who is individually notable contributed to them. If KenJen indeed contributed true content to the archive, then maybe. But still, is simply being a J! contestant enough to make the cut? Is being a writer enough if no one paid her any mind? You're dodging the issue of notability. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 03:07, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a no-bullshit fact-only archive, without fantasies, speculations, essays and vandals. You call it "fansite" with derogatory smirk, I call it community volunteering. I have no objection if you contest it at the WP:RS noticeboard, wherever it is. - Altenmann >t 03:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is an IMDb-credited TV writer. TenPoundHammer's here because she was on Jeopardy! once, and TenPoundHammer has made it his mission to pare any Jeopardy!-related content from the encyclopedia. His edit record is becoming more and more littered with this nonsense. [1] Robert K S (talk) 04:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

False accusation much? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 04:42, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep certainly seems to meet notability standards based on the sources in the article. Umbralcorax (talk) 04:39, 11 November 2009 (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.