Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bente Christensen
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. Pigman☿ 03:25, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bente Christensen
No sources since June 2006. Article may have been an autobiographical page initially. Hammer1980·talk 00:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Keep: And add sources. She is obviously notable if she has been nominated for
62 Emmy's. - Rjd0060 (talk) 00:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)- Comment - How long for? Article has been waiting 15 months already. Maybe save to Users page until sources found. Hammer1980·talk 00:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Lack of sources present in the article shouldn't be a reason to delete it. Given the IMDB source below, it shows she is notable. That is a major award, although she did not win, she was still nominated, and that should help with the notability issue. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- However, lack of sources in the entire universe IS a reason to delete. The sources that do exist confirm that she holds a job. Holding a job, even if she is really good at her job, does not instantly make her notable. There are no "non-trivial" sources in existence, and WP:N requires that any sources used to establish notability must be non-trivial (i.e. contain real prose themselves, and which are not simply directory information).--Jayron32|talk|contribs 01:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, thats why I said "present in the article". Generally speaking, lets say there were sources, which only made her notable because of her emmy nominations, would you say keep then? I am sticking with Keep, but it is apparent that it probably will be deleted. I know the sourcing does present a problem, and thats probably the only issue here. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- It is my only issue. 15 months is long time to wait for sources that should be easily found.Hammer1980·talk 10:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, thats why I said "present in the article". Generally speaking, lets say there were sources, which only made her notable because of her emmy nominations, would you say keep then? I am sticking with Keep, but it is apparent that it probably will be deleted. I know the sourcing does present a problem, and thats probably the only issue here. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- However, lack of sources in the entire universe IS a reason to delete. The sources that do exist confirm that she holds a job. Holding a job, even if she is really good at her job, does not instantly make her notable. There are no "non-trivial" sources in existence, and WP:N requires that any sources used to establish notability must be non-trivial (i.e. contain real prose themselves, and which are not simply directory information).--Jayron32|talk|contribs 01:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Lack of sources present in the article shouldn't be a reason to delete it. Given the IMDB source below, it shows she is notable. That is a major award, although she did not win, she was still nominated, and that should help with the notability issue. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Delete I did two google searches, one using the name Bente Christensen, and one using her alternate name of Bente Christensen-Dukes. Neither one produced any non-trivial sources. Several directory-style filmographies were produced by IMDB and other like sites, but these amount to trivial content and provide no information to expand the article past the trivial/directory stage. Without any real prose text existing in external sources, she is not notable. If Rjd0060 thinks that sources exist which DO establish notability, perhaps he could provide those sources so that we can add them to the article in question? --Jayron32|talk|contribs 01:05, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete According to IMDB (the only cited source on the page), she was nominated for two Daytime Emmys, not six Emmys. I've changed that on the page. She was nominated for designing the set of The Price Is Right, and she shared those nominations with two other people. Looking at Production designer#Noted motion picture production designers, the number of notable people in this line of work is certainly much smaller than the number of people that have been nominated for awards. Fundamentally, there are no secondary sources claiming notability for this person. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 01:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. BlueMoonlet makes a good deconstruction of the shortfalls in notability. I would feel differently should she have actually won those Emmy awards, but we don't need to have an article for everyone who managed to get a nomination over the years. That is a pretty long list. --Dhartung | Talk 02:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as there is no relaible evidence of notability. Pastordavid (talk) 18:50, 28 November 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.
