Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chaunty spillane


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Chaunty spillane

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I came across this as an A7 candidate and while the assertion of notability is wafer thin, it's still there via her having acted in notable films. However that said, these roles are all non-named extra roles, many of which are uncredited. (IE, none of the roles are major, which is required per WP:NACTOR.) For example, it's hard to say that Ghostbusters was her break through role when she was playing "Show Girl Ghost" in an uncredited role. None of the things in the article give notability, as a search brought up nothing to establish how any of it is notable - actors are not automatically notable for existing (WP:ITEXISTS) nor do they automatically inherit notability from an association with notable persons, films, or organizations - we need sourcing to establish how these roles were major. (WP:NOTINHERITED) If not for the local coverage for her, I'd have speedied this but I figure that this is just enough to where it'd be safer to send it to AfD and have it as a more firm delete, given that there have been various attempts to create this article in the past. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:26, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete does not pass the notability guidelines for actresses.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:08, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete does not pass WP:NACTOR, other activities are around non-notable entities. Article has more of a promotional tone than encyclopedic.-- &#9790;Loriendrew&#9789;  &#9743;(ring-ring)  00:31, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

–––––

The article is of notability and per guidelines of notability requirements only requires three reliable resources that are in depth about the person of notability. The following are three reliable sources directly from the page article proposed for possible deletion: Spillane, Chaunty. "Chaunty FollowingTheNerd Article". FollowingTheNerd. Spillane, Chaunty. "Local Actress Appears in Ghostbusters". The Westfield News. The Westfield Newspaper. The Westfield Newspaper. Retrieved 8 August 2016. Markham, Brett. Modern Caveman- The Complete Paleo Lifestyle Handbook. Retrieved 8 August 2016. (WP:ITEXISTS)

If I may so gently correct a statement above regarding Chaunty Spillane's roles and credited or uncredited status: She has six credited roles including the Ghostbusters credit which I'd like to mention next. Chaunty's role in Ghostbusters was significant and a break through because, although not credited properly, she did play the role of Gertrude Aldridge (whom is a major character in the blockbuster film). She also has 8 TV commercials in two years as well as two listed magazine covers and featured articles about her. She is also in a book sold in Barnes and Noble as well as Amazon.com as a yoga model and is mentioned in the book. WP:NACTOR

Chaunty Spillane is notable and the (WP:NOTINHERITED) does not apply as she is not just the every day actor a lot has accomplished in her career in a short period of time managing to do so while not living in LA or NY. In reference to the text above, the roles actors play is not an easy process, nor is the average local Boston/NY actress gain as much notability and a trending topic as Chaunty has. The actors must work hard and put a lot of effort as well as practice into auditioning first for a role and then waiting to receive a call back if the actor received approval for the role.

I find the idea of scheming to give this article a "firm delete" rather than a "speedy deletion" as stated above is malicious. That kind of behavior is not accepted on Wikipedia as stated in its own guidelines. Various attempts were made to create the article, but there were also a lot of Wikipedia authors who were in favor of and helped by slightly editin the previous attempts mentioned above to create this article to help it remain "live". All in all, the local coverage plus the above "corrected information" regarding crediting of the actress rather than focusing on a few uncredited roles is enough evidence to establish notability. 2601:19B:4300:DF35:451D:A615:71F1:F493 (talk) 19:19, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * IMBd has an entirely different actress listed as Gertrude Aldridge, Bess Rous. Rous is also listed as the performer in this USA Today article, this Mercury News article, and this one by the New Yorker. (There are also people selling photographs signed by Rous at the Ghostbusters premiere.) In other words, there's nothing to substantiate that she plays Aldridge at all - and if she was Aldridge then she desperately needs to get her agent to contact a lot of media outlets. Wikipedia is not a place to make corrections of this nature and until there are massive corrections about the performer in the media, Wikipedia has to assume that she is not Aldridge and that she was only a show girl ghost. I also have to say that I found this link that shows a Facebook post of Spillane's, where she's holding a photograph of herself with the credit "show girl ghost". In other words, there's more evidence to show that she isn't Aldridge and is instead a non-notable background character. If she is, then it's up to Spillane and her agent to correct these errors, not Wikipedia. (And I also need to caution you that it's not a good idea to go about trying to put this on Wikipedia or other outlets before the agent corrects this because if she isn't Aldridge then this can backfire badly on Spillane.) I do also need to point out that if this was her, then that would be her only substantial role to date and odds are this would just redirect to the cast page for the film. As far as her appearing in a book goes, this by itself does not give notability. The book itself would have to have been the subject of RS that mention Spillane's contribution to the work. If her appearance in the book was not substantial (ie, she would not have received an in-depth mention about her participation in any given RS about the work) then that would not give notability. In the end notability must be established via coverage in independent and reliable sources, which is lacking here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:15, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I also found this YouTube video of the movie's end credits, which list Bess Rous as Aldridge. All legality of the person recording the end credits aside, I think that this is quite definitive proof that Spillane was not Aldridge - it's possible that news outlets might credit the wrong person, but the movie credits will most certainly bill the proper person, at least in a film such as this and in a role as visible as that one. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:23, 17 August 2016 (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.