Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ava Santana

: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. MBisanz talk 02:35, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

=[[Ava Santana]]=

:{{la|Ava Santana}} ([{{fullurl:Ava Santana|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ava Santana}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Bit actress, no evidence of meeting WP:BIO, not much in google, prod removed without reasoning Delete Secret account 22:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:02, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:03, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Strong delete Playing Girl #2 does not meet guidelines for inclusion. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:33, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Question about this woman of many names. Has anyone checked into all her other AKAs for notability? She is also Kathryn Elizabeth Knighten, Kathryn E. Knighten, Katie Knighten, and Ava Knight Santana. Just asking. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 03:52, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete Has anyone actually looked at her IMDB page and seen that she has many other credits other than girl # 2. Does every Actor start off getting starring roles? She seems to be a good actress and has actually been in many credited films with pretty good performances. Why delete her page because she has played girl #2 in her past? She has been in many films having bigger roles since then. I believe this to be an unfair assumption and judgement of a person who has a career that is not yet notable according to your standards. Lots of people actually enjoy Ava Santana's performances. I vote to keep her page up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flowerlily (talk • contribs) 06:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete - fails to meet WP:ENTERTAINER, and as for coverage about her, the there is only the UGO article for top 50 under 25. -- Whpq (talk) 17:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - this young actress already has 15 film credits (according to IMDB.com), and that is in just 4 years of acting. Keep as stub article - it will grow. Esasus (talk) 21:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

:*But those roles are not what one would call significant. She may become notable in the future, but it doesn't appear to be so right now. -- Whpq (talk) 22:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

  • That's not a reason for keeping an article, read on our notability guidelines, and verification guidelines before mass commenting on AFDs. It will give you advice on participating in AFDs in the future. Secret account 14:19, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Strong keep as per esasus. I find it interesting that the NYT has a page on her,[http://movies.nytimes.com/person/1603980/Ava-Santana] but wikipedians think we shouldn't have a page on her. Ikip (talk) 01:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment - the page form the NY Times is a directory entry for their online site. It is content fed from All Movie Guide, and the inclusion criteria is similar to IMDB which is every person who ever has had a credit in a film gets listed. If you actually read the entry, you will find that it is almost content-free.-- Whpq (talk) 05:39, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

:::Indeed. Here is her biography page: [http://movies.nytimes.com/person/1603980/Ava-Santana/biography]. After the article is deleted we will have the same content as they do... ie. nada. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:39, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

::::Well, technically speaking, not so, as the full biography there says "Gender: Female". -- Whpq (talk) 10:26, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

:::well, it's meant to be a link to her bio at All Movie Guide, and the reason it's blank is because there isn't one, as I confirmed by searching there directly. DGG (talk) 20:46, 31 January 2009 (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.