Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brandy Howard


 * 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. NW ( Talk ) 02:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Brandy Howard

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - clear-cut failure of WP:BIO and WP:N. This person obviously is not the subject of reliable third-party references to scrape her past the bare minimum required by relevant policies and guidelines. PROD removed, so by all means let's spend another week debating her lack of notability. Eddie&#39;s Teddy (talk) 06:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - her large number of commercial appearances could arguably take her over the "prolific" threshold in WP:ENT; the article needs cleanup (and sources) but I'd err on the side of retention. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:58, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete zero notable films, only one article about her (but that is in what I think is a fairly reputable blog).    DGG ( talk ) 01:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - her large number of verifiable commercial appearances and her resume of relevent television on imdb (which is a reliable 3rd party source) and the article on the movie she co-wrote, is starring in and is producing is also from a reliable 3rd party source. She is referenced on several other VERY NOTABLE pages of wikipedia and has her name has been blog and google searched leading people to this page. I vote for retention- although I have no idea what I'm doing here. Unclehowardgoldman (talk) 02:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Uncle Howard Goldman is the collective name for the writing partnership consisting of Julie Goldman and the article's subject and so this editor obviously has a complete conflict of interest. Eddie&#39;s Teddy (talk) 04:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep- Brandy Howard is becoming notable in the gay community due to her affiliation and project with Julie Goldman and Tammy Etheridge. There are 2 seperate articles illustrating this and the website for the movie. The interest is there and this wikipedia page is providing valuable information to interested parties in said community. GordyLaChance (talk) 05:29, 22 October 2009 (UTC) : — GordyLaChance (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep as a user of Wikipedia surfing for information on Julie Goldman - finding Brandy Howard - She seems very notable. Perhaps You need to define Notable and explain who you are to judge what makes someone of note or not. I didn't realize there was a board room of judges deciding who's notable - what's notable and what's not. I searched Brandy Howard online and he has been in major Network Television shows, Independent Films, national commercials, and print ads, and as an actor that makes her Very notable. She has several third party mentions, Afterellen.com, Autostraddle.com, and the clips on Youtube of commercials are third party clips. Her Page should be kept and you should all find better things to do - or at least do your research before you start ruining someone's hard work and livelihood.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Garybusy (talk • contribs) 05:38, 22 October 2009 (UTC) : — Garybusy (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * The relevant standard for notability in this case are the general notability guideline which states in relevant part that a topic is presumed notable if it "has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Significant coverage means that sources address the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material. Reliable means sources need editorial integrity to allow verifiable evaluation of notability, per the reliable source guideline. Sources may encompass published works in all forms and media. Availability of secondary sources covering the subject is a good test for notability. Sources, for notability purposes, should be secondary sources, as those provide the most objective evidence of notability. The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred. Independent of the subject excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc." Of the sources being offered: IMDB is not considered reliable; automaticmovie.com is the official site for a film in which the subject appeared and so is not independent of her; nicethingsthemovie.com is the site for a film the subject is trying to finance and so is not independent of her; itsnotgayitsfashion.com is the subject's blog and not independent of her; Gay Pimpin' with Jonny McGovern is a Wikipedia article and Wikipedia is not a reliable source for Wikipedia, nor does McGovern mention her on his website; the subject's YouTube channel is not independent of her; the AfterEllen article menions the subject in a single sentence out of a three page interview with Julie Goldman and so is not significant coverage; The OUTmedia.org article is about Julie Goldman and mentions the subject in a single sentence and so is not significant coverage. The site describes itself as being for the promotion of LGBT talent and so may not be verifiable under the standards required for reliable sources.
 * There is a secondary guideline for notability of people, WP:BIO. Under BIO, a person may be notable if: s/he "has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for one" (not the case here); s/he "has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field" (not the case here). As an entertainer, a person may be notable if s/he "has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" (no reliable sources indicate that the subject's roles were "significant" [many are non-recurring roles in single episodes of TV series] or that any of the films meet our notability guidelines except for Pandemic (TV miniseries) in which she is billed 35th); s/he "has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following" (no reliable sources indicate this to be true); s/he "has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment" (no reliable sources indicate this to be true and the only assertion that she has, for appearing in 50 TV commercials, is neither unique, prolific nor innovative).
 * So you see, I have done my research despite your snippy assumption to the contrary and I also searched for actual reliable sources that discuss the subject in any detail before opening this AFD. And now, by posting the above, I've done your research too, since you clearly couldn't be bothered to actually read the guidelines for including articles in Wikipedia and have no informed basis whatsoever for your opinion. Eddie&#39;s Teddy (talk) 07:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:N is the standard for establishing a presumption of notability. That presumption is rebuttable; notability may also be established without satisfying WP:N.  The secondary guidelines (in this case WP:ENT) provide guidance on interpreting this presumption in specific cases. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * comment relocated to the end of mine. WP:ENT is a sub-section of WP:BIO and it is addressed and rebutted in its entirety (along with the relevant remainder of BIO) in the second paragraph of my comment (no significant roles in notable projects, no fanbase or cult following, no unique, prolific or innovative contributions). Eddie&#39;s Teddy (talk) 13:17, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:ARTIST. The refs and a search show no verifiable notability. Johnuniq (talk) 06:55, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Her large number of commercials is a claim to notability, but I can not find significant coverage in reliable sources to establish notability.  GB fan  talk 13:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Her handful of relatively minor TV/film credits are definitely not nearly enough to make her notable (Just Shoot Me is a notable show, but she was apparently only in one episode), and, although I'm unaware of any official Wikipedia policy addressing the matter, it doesn't seem reasonable to ascribe notability for appearances in commercials, no matter how numerous, unless those commercials were themselves very noteworthy and she had a major part in them (like the "Can You Hear Me Now?" guy from the Verizon commercials). This does not seem to be the case.  So, in summary, as an actor she's completely non-notable.  As for her writing, that may be notable if and when their screenplay The Nicest Thing is actually produced&mdash;the article refers to "rumored attachments" and who's "slated to direct", but that's all crystal balling.  So... she may very well be notable in the future.  She isn't now. &mdash;Smeazel (talk) 02:16, 24 October 2009 (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.