Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brenna D'Amico


 * 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 Draftify. Moving to draft space, per discussion. Now found at Draft:Brenna D'Amico  78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 17:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Brenna D'Amico

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:TOOSOON. Not enough in sources to establish general notability (most of the references presented in the article just merely mention her), and insufficient significant roles to establish notability as an actress (the Descendants films, where she's actually not in one of the major roles, are collectively taken as one film role). MPFitz1968 (talk) 17:29, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete – this is equivalent to Mitchell Hope, but even more so because, unlike Hope, D'Amico is not even a "headliner" in the Descendants TV movie series. And, aside from Descendants, she has no significant roles, and so looks to be a WP:NACTOR fail. IOW, we need more than that Chicago Sun-Times profile to establish notability here. An unordered TV pilot certainly does not do that... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * To follow up, it looks like there are a couple of good sources in there that contribute towards notability – the ABC7 Chicago one, and the Chicago Sun-Times one. If there were a couple more like that (esp. from non-Chicago media outfits), this would indeed be a borderline case. But I agree with others that this one just doesn't meet WP:NACTOR right now. P.S. I have no prejudice against Draftifying over Deleting for this one, as that was does with Draft:Mitchell Hope as well, which is a similar case. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:03, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:15, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - Hey, sorry this is my first page I've created so I'm super new to this process but I've had a read about the deletion process and stuff you guys have mentioned and I can see the points you're making. I'd like to throw my two cents in the ring as to why I think this page shouldn't be deleted. As a first, I realise she's not one of the main four leads on the Descendants films, but she is still a significant character and has been important to the plot in both films released so far. I understand her role in Descendants isn't counted as more than one role, although Descendants: Wicked World is separate from the films so that is two roles, and she is a series regular on Overnights, which is a digital series on the YouTube certified 'Brat' account. Out of the 5 episodes that have aired, two have been watched over 1 million times, with one at 1.8 million views. The other three episodes average around 600,000 views. This doesn't seem to be 'unnotable' as stated in the WP:NACTOR categories, and therefore there is three notable roles to her name, not to mention her other credits. Again, I get that the ABC comedy hasn't been picked up, but it does show hope when one considers the executive producer attached to it. Further, I have added more citations now, 6 out of the 12 refer directly to D'Amico as opposed to only mentioning her. There are now multiple news networks on there, not just the Chicago Sun-Times. Further, I added a discography section as she appeared on a promotional single for Descendants: Wicked World. I believe all the citations I've used are valid and legitimate.
 * Super keen to keep discussing this with you guys, I really hope you'll change your mind and let this stay. I worked really hard on finding the sources and making sure everything I have is backed up.
 * Out of interest, though, what does happen if this page gets deleted? I see in the Mitchell Hope page you linked it's still technically there, even though it wasn't allowed to stay. Does this page just stay in the universe somewhere or does it get deleted altogether? I'd just hate to lose all the code and references that I worked on - Emag346 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:18, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You can request that it be moved to WP:Draftspace – that's what happened to Mitchell Hope. In this case, that would be a reasonable action. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:46, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I'd really rather it stayed up, because I think it's a legitimate article. Not to throw any other pages under the bus, but in terms of other cast members of Descendants, Thomas Doherty has far less acting credentials than Brenna D'Amico and his page has been around since September 2017. Sure, he's a lead on The Lodge, but he definitely isn't a lead in Descendants, in fact D'Amico is credited before him in the credit roll at the end (and the credits are not listed in order of appearance). He has only had two roles of 'significance', not 'multiple', which seems it would go against the WP:NACTOR criteria. I'm really curious as to why this page has been picked up, and not his, especially because I see in the history of that page that you, IJBall made contributions to it, yet you have found issue with this D'Amico page.
 * This is basically WP:OSE, but I voted "delete" on Thomas Doherty at AfD, IIRC, and still feel that Doherty is also short on WP:NACTOR grounds. But the difference is that, 1) Doherty did "headline" a 2-season TV series (The Lodge) which definitely qualifies as a "significant role" in terms of NACTOR, and 2) he had multiple local press profiles (D'Amico has just the one). IOW, Doherty is much stronger on WP:BASIC/WP:NACTOR grounds. By contrast, if Mitchell Hope doesn't qualify for a mainspace article then D'Amico certainly doesn't – IOW, if this article was sent through WP:AfC, I doubt it would be accepted, just as Mitchell Hope wasn't. So I am still a "delete" on this one. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:03, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for redirecting me to WP:OSE, I didn't know about that and I agree. As some counters to your points, D'Amico has more than one press profile, she has four that are referenced in her Wikipedia page. Further, I don't think it's fair to say if Hope doesn't qualify then D'Amico doesn't. As you said, that is basically WP:OSE, but also, D'Amico has over double the amount of credited roles than Hope, over and above Descendants, and within some of those, she hasn't been just a one episode guest (see Keys and Overnights) - Emag346 (talk)


 * Delete – per nomination.-- Philip J Fry   Talk  23:29, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, although there is nothing wrong with draftifying it. This is a very well crafted article, however, the subject simply doesn't meet either WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. Might be a case of WP:TOOSOON, but right now, according to guidelines, simply needs to be deleted or draftified.  Onel 5969  TT me 02:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all your input, it's great to hear feedback. If this is going to be deleted, can I request it gets moved to WP:Draftspace so it isn't lost completely? - Emag346 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosmicyah12 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


 * draftify – It has potential, more sources are need, till than incubate as draft.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 01:21, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Draft has only one prominent role at present but has potential so draftify Atlantic306 (talk) 19:10, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Draftify per others. WP:TOOSOON for an article. Well-written, so move it to a place where it can be worked upon. Narky Blert (talk)


 * 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.