Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tonicha Lawrence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. SoWhy 11:34, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tonicha Lawrence (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)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. L293D ( • ) 02:49, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep substantial coverage in reliable independent source.s in addition to the articles cited in the article other sources include: The Mirror (6 May 1997). "Tonicha is star No5 to quit Emmerdale". The Mirror. Retrieved 2011-02-16, The Mirror (12 January 1998). "I was killed off in a crash days after Di's death.. it was such bad taste; By EMMERDALE'S TONICHA JERONIMO". The Mirror. Retrieved 2011-02-16, and The Mirror (13 January 1998). "Emmerdale bosses pushed me to the edge of madness; TONICHA JERONIMO ON HER BITTER SPLIT FROM THE HIT SOAP". The Mirror. Retrieved 2011-02-16. And clicking on the "News" link above returns numerous articles about her. FloridaArmy (talk) 04:12, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Any links to these sources, please? -The Gnome (talk) 09:34, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • TV's a family affair for Leeds mum and daughter actresses - Yorkshire Evening Post February 22, 2017
  • Former Emmerdale soap star in running for business award - Yorkshire Evening Post May 15, 2013
192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:58, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thnks, 192.160.216.52 . Any links to those sources? Yours and/or FloridaArmy's? Or are they all offline? -The Gnome (talk) 09:28, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Did you try googling the headlines provided? FloridaArmy (talk) 11:23, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're supposed to bring on the links, if there are any links. Or is this too supposed to be the work of other editors who "complete your work," etc? -The Gnome (talk) 07:33, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thx, The Gnome. I have no idea if they're online or not. I found them in Lexis/Nexis. What does onlineness of sources have to do with anything? 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification. The question was put in order to help us double check those sources. That's all. According to the notability rules for persons, "trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." -The Gnome (talk) 07:33, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for failing WP:NACTOR. Has not had "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions;" does not have "a large fan base or a significant 'cult' following;" hasn't "made unique, prolific, or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." -The Gnome (talk) 07:33, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:15, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 10:15, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Contributors to this AfD are invited to examine again the WP:NACTOR wording. Subject must have had "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." Meaning that a significant role in one notable TV show apparently does not seem to satisfy Wikipedia's (new & severely tightened) criteria. We may be fans of the subject's work and admire her contributions but the rules are quite clear. -The Gnome (talk) 11:17, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Can we have some discussion of the sources please. The Mirror for example is a tabloid and no longer an RS

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 05:08, 25 April 2018 (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.