Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amanda Balon

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. —Kurykh 23:22, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Amanda Balon

Amanda Balon (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unreferenced biography of a ten-year-old actor. Shirley Temple was notable at that age, but she was the exception. Shalom ^Hello 18:38, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. Created by Annietour06, a probable COI, but edited by other users. In definite need of reliable third party sources, but may yet be notable.--Absurdist 18:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - note that the author name is very similar to the website listed in the article —Travis^talk 19:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per lack of "significant coverage" from independent sources Corpx 19:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unless World Championships of Performing Arts is considered an award important enough to confer notability. --Dhartung | Talk 19:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable enough for seperate article and I see no possibility or ability for merger. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 20:06, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• • Comment, it seemed relatively easy to find and add references for her by doing a dogpile.com search. --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 20:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• Neutral with comment: I'm kind of challenged on this one. Google turns up 393 hits for her name, which isn't much, but there's a number of media sources that give her a few lines for her performance. She's in a fairly key role on an internationally touring play, and gets pretty good, if short, reviews, such as this. I guess the question is whether a secondary role on an internationally touring presentation provides notability enough for an article. I can't decide either way, just yet. Tony Fox (arf!) review? 20:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, I have a few problems with the article. First off, it states she is ten years old (will she forever be 10 years old? It should just state her birthdate). Its badly written and should have more sources to prove that she is notable.Callelinea 00:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with User:Callelinea's comments, but I don't think that any of them justifies deletion. There are certainly secondary sources that cover her. Are these numerous enough and do they focus on her enough? As User:Tony Fox says, it's a judgment call. My judgment falls on the side of keep. Sarcasticidealist 12:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• Comment I'm neutral on the deletion, but badly written is not a reason for deletion.--Fabrictramp 16:07, 19 July 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.