Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susannah Fowle

:{{la|Susannah Fowle}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Susannah_Fowle Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Susannah Fowle}})

Sourced only to IMDb and no claim to notability otherwise. While she did have a starring role in a film, is a thespian, and was an actor on an award-winning TV series, the latter's article doesn't even mention her and NACTOR requires evidence of significant roles in multiple films/shows/productions, which hasn't been shown here. —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 21:32, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

• Keep There are [https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1980/10/29/schoolgirl-snipes-and-snubs/63c94931-fe39-4ce2-a2e6-78f07b2e3342/ two sentences here], a [https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1986/01/10/film-talk/403d699d-9abb-47e2-9d4f-91c11bc85d89/ mention here] about starring in a film, [http://www.nytimes.com/movies/movie/19608/the-getting-of-wisdom/overview mention in NY Times], a [http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20077503,00.html review (negative) in People magazine], coverage in [http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/aug/16/the-getting-of-wisdom-rewatched-a-benchmark-for-australian-teen-drama The Guardian] (including her photo in the article), a [https://voir.ca/nouvelles/actualite-cinematographique/2012/04/17/sorties-dvd-de-la-semaine-12/ brief mention] in a French publication. So there is coverage, admittedly not much in-depth, but she's clearly getting roles, and people here know how articles about actors tend to stick in our media-focussed world. Can anybody explain why her pageview statistics limp along at 2 a day, and then -- on one day -- [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/#project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range=latest-90&pages=Susannah_Fowle go over 900]? So I'm thinking it's an article problem, not a notability problem.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 21:33, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 23:47, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

• Keep as reliable source coverage has been presented above such as The People Magazine, and The Guardian, not in depth but a growing list of sources combined so that WP:BASIC is passed. Atlantic306 (talk) 01:00, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.