Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erika Coleman

:{{la|Erika Coleman}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Erika_Coleman Stats])

:({{Find sources|Erika Coleman}})

Fails WP:GNG I can find no reliable sources, she has had a small number of very minor parts so far. Theroadislong (talk) 20:28, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

• Weak keep - Not so sure she fails GNG. This upcoming Big Stone Gap film seems to be at least somewhat significant, and as it comes closer to release, I'll bet that some reliable sources will arise. Until then, I'd say we could dispose of the fluffy prose and perhaps leave it as a filmography table. The article may have been created a bit prematurely, but I don't see this as a substantial reason for deletion. Jon (aka Blurred203) holler 21:15, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
• keep for weak keep reasons mentioned above.24.0.133.234 (talk) 21:52, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

• Delete, while she may become notable, there's no indication that she is. (And I don't think a single supporting role will suffice, no matter who stars in the movie - unless she wins a "best supporting actor" Oscar or the like.) No prejudice against re-creation when there actually is significant coverage of her in reliable sources. Huon (talk) 23:37, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

• Delete - I am unable to find any in-depth coverage in reliable sources. The possibility of her becoming notable in the future is not a valid reason for keeping the article now. Fails all three criteria of WP:NACTOR. - MrX 00:58, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

• Delete. Fails GNG and NACTOR. Maybe she'll make a big splash in Big Stone Gap, but my WP:CRYSTALBALL is in the shop for repairs. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:06, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

• Delete - No significant coverage about her. Her body of work has no indication of notability now. Any notability for the future is purely speculative. -- Whpq (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2013 (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.