Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abby Hagyard


 * 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  keep. No arguments to delete besides nominator. Non-admin closure.  Jujutacular  T · C 01:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Abby Hagyard

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unnotable actor. Fails WP:N and WP:ENTERTAINER, Without significant coverage in reliable, third-party quality sources, cannot meet our Policy regarding living people. The series itself is, of course, notable, but it had over 120 cast members, and its notability does not confer to them all. Hagyard, like many, received no significant coverage for her role nor her life after. It should be noted that the article was created by an editor with the same name whose only edit was to make this article. Prod removed by new editor User:Iftelse with claim of "well-known Canadian actress, rm PROD". However, as noted, she has no significant coverage. I found one brief mention in Alanis Morissette: A Biography, no news coverage, and no reliable sources that can even confirm her other claimed voice work. Despite the article claims, IMDB's listings show that she did minor voice work for the listed series, except For Better Or For Worse, which was not a "series" rather a couple of animated specials. Again, without actual significant coverage in reliable sources, she is not notable, and the article cannot meet WP:BLP. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 20:53, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. — --  AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 20:56, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep,, , and two ACTRA Awards: .  The article should be re-written with these and some other sources.  --Joshua Scott (LiberalFascist) 01:09, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * All of those appear to be local sources, which do not work to establish notability for a person. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 01:12, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. Meets WP:ANYBIO because of the ACTRA awards.  (talk) 15:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per sources indicated above. They aren't small town papers discussing the local high school play. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 06:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Solid keep per diligent WP:AFTER of Joshua Scott. ACTRA Awards allow individual to meet WP:ANYBIO, and coverage in reliable sources from 1975 through 2010 exceeds WP:GNG... and with a weekly circulation of nearly a million, the Ottawa Citizen is not exactly some small-town local paper.  Notability in Canada is emminently notable for en.Wikipedia.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:16, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions.  — Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:36, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  — Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 22:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Not much to say here that isn't obvious-- major awards, coverage in reliable sources, high-profile roles... Yet someone wants to delete? Wow... Dekkappai (talk) 23:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Coverage notwithstanding, individuals who have won notable awards (in this case ACTRA Awards) have in the past been near-universally considered notable.  Re: local notability, "local" is defined in Notability (local interests) as  a city, town, village, metropolitan area, or other similar localized region, and goes on to say "Articles on local interests are perfectly acceptable for inclusion on Wikipedia."  A reading of the rest of that policy makes it clear it's attempting to cover similar sort of ground to WP:MILL - that is, to say that while a thing may receive significant coverage, it may nevertheless be run-of-the-mill if that coverage is all from its immediate community.  Coverage throughout a major city or the entirety of a state is not local coverage; there is no evidence to suggest this actress or the ACTRA awards are in any sense "run-of-the-mill" or "of interest only to a small community".  For transparency's sake, I should say I was alerted to this discussion by MichaelQSchmidt, who did not appear to be expecting me to vote either way but was merely looking for my opinion on the underlying notability. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, purposely not seeking AFD input, I was hoping DFW might simply advise in how I might further improve the article, just as I also discussed this article with the nominator at User talk:AnmaFinotera (diff).  I'd like it to be as good as it can be.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep but switch to the newer citation system so we can use reflist. The sources look good to me, I would like to see more. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ahh... or in this case, you must mean " " as created in September '09... I don't use that one until I have at least 10 references... and so... having 11, I just incorporated it. Thanks for the reminder.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 04:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep A major newspaper covers the person, they are notable.  D r e a m Focus  03:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per editor DustFormsWords. Possibly the 'legal problem' section could be removed if anyone considers it unduly negative. Otherwise a very nice article. FeydHuxtable (talk) 11:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep As noted when I removed the PROD, she is a well-known Canadian actress. Iftelse (talk) 16:27, 4 June 2010 (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.