Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susie Cusack

: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. Drmies (talk) 18:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

=[[Susie Cusack]]=

:{{la|Susie Cusack}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Susie Cusack}})

Deleted via PROD and recreated, so I'm treating this as a contested PROD and taking it here. Fails the notability guidelines. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 00:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

  • I've restored the full history. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 00:59, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Note that the article has been recreated with new content. I am going to add some of the things from the prior version that belong (if this article is going to exist).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I was [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=467832158&oldid=467831818 led to believe] that there was content that needed to be added back to this, but I don't see content in the prior version that is missing from this version.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:26, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 01:01, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete no sources presented in the article to establish notability. Her family ties are interesting, but notability isn't inherited. Hot Stop UTC 01:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I note also Bill Cusack, whose article similarly claims only inherited notability, and whose career seems to be a few minor "man in hat" type roles. Testovergian (talk) 04:04, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Keep - AfD is not for cleanup. Sources exist, and they only need to exist out there to satisfy notability. The article does not need to actually have them (that's for cleanup/improvement). In any case, Cusack was profiled by the Chicago Tribune along with her two sisters back in 1992 and I've added a couple of references to the article. Night Ranger (talk) 02:46, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

::I read the abstract from the article you mentioned, and it sort-of proves the point she isn't notable "It was hardest on Ann...and on Susie, who says she learned to fight for family attention in "a dynamic" in which two of the older kids had become larger than life-at least outside the confines of the house in Evanston." [http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/access/24396054.html?dids=24396054:24396054&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Apr+12%2C+1992&author=NINA+BURLEIGH%2C+a+Chicago+free-lance+writer.&pub=Chicago+Tribune+%28pre-1997+Fulltext%29&desc=SIBLING+ARTISTRY+Three+theatrical+sisters+%28not+to+mention+brother+John%29+make+for+a+talented+show-biz+family&pqatl=google] Hot Stop UTC 12:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Keep Encyclopedic content exists so an article should. I have done some digging through the sources and I am not sure if the minimum levels of sourcing are available to support WP:N. Almost all roles are minor and WP:GNG is weak.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete, soft news coverage generally is either insufficiently substantial or fails the one-event guideline. Nyttend (talk) 14:02, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment We do have two major award wins, a Chicago Film Critics Association Awards and a Golden Globe that would seem to push at WP:ANYBIO, unless we wish to ignore them becase the awards and recognition was shared with others. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 04:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I am copying what I said on your talk page here: "I am not so sure we get WP:ANYBIO out of her awards. The GG is a special award not even included at 51st Golden Globe Awards. The other one also seems a bit trivial."
  • Keep I have found, what I believe to be the bare minimum to survive notability by expanding my search to "Susan Cusack".--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:52, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment: The nature of her award wins is really problematic. Both awards are collective, The Golden Globe is a special award for the Short Cuts cast, in which she appears to have a less-than-minor role, and I'm not sure we should consider any credited and uncredited actor in the movie as eligible for point 1 of ANYBIO. The Chicago Film Critics Association Award is also a collective, special award to the Cusack family, shared with Dick, Nancy, Ann, Bill, John and Joan Cusack, and the rationale behind the award ("Commitment to Chicago Award") does not seem connected to artistic merits. Cavarrone (talk) 11:21, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • :How does a well-known and notable award becomes less well-known or significant if it is shared by others? As any such award is given in recognition of creative efforts, you offer a conundrum. When a notable organization wishes to recognize and award creativity, they award those reponsible... whether one or five. An award is not neccessarily diuted if shared. Or would we now think an Academy Award become less well-known or significant if it is shared? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q.
  • :Personally, I am more concerned about the notability of the awards than whether they were shared.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:13, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
  • ::: The Short Cuts cast probably includes one hundred of actors, many of them don't appear on the screen for more than a couple of minutes or aren't even credited, so are all of them eligible for an article on Wikipedia, are all automatically notable? I sincerely doubt that... an Award does not become less significant in itself if it is shared, but the Award-winning is probably less notable if he/she shares the award with an half hundred of other actors and if his contribution to the award-victory is less than minimal or even nonexistent.

::::I would not have doubts if Susie Cusack had a significant role in Short Cuts, or if she had been explicitly named between the awared, or at least if the collective award had included a minor number of winners, but under these circumstances I don't think we should consider this Golden Globe in order to estabilish her notability and the notability of anyone else of the hundred of actors that had starred in that movie. Per "common sense". Cavarrone (talk) 20:06, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Delete as insufficiently notable on her own. And yes, Bill's article should probably come up next. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 05:08, 5 January 2012 (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.