Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robin Raven

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 delete. --Coredesat 06:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Robin Raven

Robin Raven (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

1) Doesn't meet Wikipedia:Notability_(people) guidelines for entertainers. 2) NPOV/Subjective 3) Seems to be written by subject or associate / Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest / Wikipedia:Autobiography 4) Some links mismatch (e.g., name of link is linked to seemingly unrelated article to avoid red linking?) Delete Touchdown Turnaround 01:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Updated to add -- this article was deleted once before according to the logs. Touchdown Turnaround 02:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete "Robin adores the public, and never misses a chance to make a public appearance" ? . Manik Raina 03:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Nothing in the article suggests she passes WP:BIO -- Selket Talk 04:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:BULL. Bigman17 04:53, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete: Non-notable actress. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 06:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Not notable - • The Giant Puffin • 13:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Basically, it says she is going to appear in a movie, and the rest is filled with fluff. And say, how would the article's author know all about the childhood aspirations, likes, dislikes, etc of an utterly non-notable actress?? Hmm... Wavy G 13:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep: I created the article. The article was speedily-deleted before as a non-notable stub. The deleter told me that in order for the article to be put up again, I would have to write more than a stub, and establish with references the case for notabilty. I believed that I had accomplished that when I put up the current version of the page. This has been reflected on the talk page since I first put the page online. Also, I would like to respond to the points made by Touchdown Turnaround.
    • First, notability guidelines. On this point, I agree that Robin Raven's inclusion only borders on meeting notability standards. Nevertheless, wikipedia is not paper, and there is very little wrong with accepting an entry that may miss the mark of notability guidelines by a small amount. I would point out that many current entries make much less of a case for notability on wikipedia right now.
    • Second, non-subjectivity in the article does not seem lacking to me. Some parts are written from info gathered online, and these sources may not be completely objective, but in rewriting the wikipedia page, I thought that I had removed any aspect of subjectivity that may be in the original sources, stripping it down to facts and general knowledge of the actress.
    • The third issue is the only one of the four that I agree with. The article was originally written by me, and I do know Robin Raven irl. However, I believe wikipedia standards regarding such conflicts of interest require only that the article be reworked by someone not in such a situation of conflict of interest. But in the question of whether or not the article should be deleted, conflict of interest in irrelevant. Articles, if deleted at all, should be deleted on the basis of whether or not an article should exist on wikipedia, not on whether or not the current edition of the page was authored by someone with a conflict of interest. Therefore, I do not believe this aspect of the situation is relevant on this afd page.
    • Fourth, the links do NOT mismatch. To say that this was done intentionally to prevent red links is not a good assessment of the page. In many places in wikipedia, such links as the ones on this page are considered standard. Take, for example, the case of characters from movies or video games. In most situations, a character will be linked to, but no content at that page would be present. Instead, it would redirect to the page containing the movie or video game that character is from. This is not meant to confuse, nor to prevent red-links. It is just because no page for the minor topic exists, and linking to the broader just make more sense for users wanting to get more information about it. On the Robin Raven page, Letters to Liesl, a book by the people behind The Sound of Music about The Sound of Music is linked to The Sound of Music. I felt this was appropriate linkage; if others disagree, they are of course free to change the links -- but even so, this has nothing to do with whether or not the page should be deleted.
I hope that you will all take note of my comments here, and decide your votes accordingly. — Eric Herboso 19:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I'm going to err on the side of caution here and put in a keep vote, Eric makes a good case, and with her name in a fully fledged feature film she will make WP:BIO, moreover I read her article in VT I saw this AFD and did remember her name, although that’s only because I have a particularly good memory. -- Librarianofages 21:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
    • The article author certainly makes a long case but I don't know that it's a good case or that it changes the situation. Either way, you should re-read WP:BIO -- being credited in a movie does not meet the guidelines for notability or inclusion in WP. Touchdown Turnaround 21:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. The article does not establish that she meets the WP:BIO criteria. She only has one credit in a feature film, which is an independent film which has not yet been released, and it is not clear whether it is even a major role. She would need to gain more public attention, particularly media coverage, before she could qualify for a Wikipedia article. --Metropolitan90 23:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - the notability bar is set rather low specifically because wiki is not paper, but even given that low bar, I don't see that this person currently meets the guidelines. -- Whpq 20:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete not notable now, when she gets more notable cum bak and do a new one that we agree with.--Zedco 12:16, 21 March 2007 (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.