Talk:Jamie Anne Allman

March 24, 2008
This page was deleted via a deletion debate not two weeks ago, and as such, I will be nominating it for speedy deletion. Jamie Anne Allman fails WP:BIO specifications in that she is not a notable enough person to warrant her own article. Links to IMdB and TV.com, both of whom merely replicate the filmography here, are not sufficient as viable secondary sources to establish notability. Hell, in real life, I have an IMdB page. I'm sorry, because you seem to have some personal stake in this actress, but she is simply not yet important enough in her field to be worthy of a encyclopedic entry. -- Lenky (talk) 13:23, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * It was entirely deleted two weeks ago because it partially violated some authors rights. As it is now it doesn't violate any. Many pages can be found similar to that one in quantity of information. It wouldn't have been deleted if there weren't those elements. I took them out and someone wants to delete it anyway. I mean, if I had made the page as it is now it wouldn't have been deleted, but someone still wants to delete it simply because it HAD some violations? It makes no sense. G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 13:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Dude, you don't seem to be understanding the problem here. The plagiarism of last time is not the problem - the problem, simply put, is that this actress isn't famous enough for a Wikipedia entry. The TV.com link that you've listed as an external link? Go and check it again - it goes to an empty page with no personal details, no work history, nothing. WP:BIO specifies that information about a notable person needs to be sourced from reliable publications that are not connected to the subject. Jamie Anne Allman fails this criteria, and fails hard. Seriously - if there are any sites out there that can establish her notability as an actress, I'll be happy for you, since she seems to be a subject close to your heart. But right now, if the only link you can provide is IMDb - no interviews, no reviews of her work, nothing - then this page should not exist. And just by the way - the last article did not get deleted for the plagiarism, but for the lack of secondary sources. Go and read the AfD notice linked in the article. Since you have the same problem this time, I imagine the outcome will be the same. -- Lenky (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)