Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anastasia S. Fontaines

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by LibStar (talk | contribs) at 12:49, 24 May 2014. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Anastasia S. Fontaines (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)

Does not appear to meet WP:NACTOR. A couple of the references cannot be found in the online versions of the magazines so it's hard to know whether, e.g., the Marie Claire article is actually primarily about Fontaines, but the sources that can be checked online do not show sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG. This is a new article created by a new editor so I have devoted some time to trying to find sources and improving the article instead of nominating it for deletion; sadly, I have been unsuccessful. bonadea contributions talk 12:35, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar  18:07, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment As far as references go, I stand by my opinion that there is not enough coverage to meet WP:GNG. The article's author is making contradictory claims (probably based on not understanding how references work) on my user talk page, but has not been able to produce any actual evidence of notability: there are a couple of Hungarian-language articles written by a freelance journalist for a couple of different magazines, which mention the actress (such as one article where she presents her favourite recipe), and a couple of radio interviews for a minor radio station. That is not significant coverage. As for WP:NACTOR, there is no claim that it is met, as there are only minor roles. --bonadea contributions talk 16:11, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete insufficient evidence to meet WP:BIO or NACTOR LibStar (talk) 12:49, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]