Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claudia Lynx (2nd nomination)


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Claudia Lynx
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unsourced and distinctly promotional biography. Guy (Help!) 15:56, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:BLP Seems as if page was made by the person themself. Her body of work is not significant. Rusto2 (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Only three edits, all in this discussion. Perhaps the editor needs to log in? Dloh  cierekim  19:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC) — Rusto2 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete. WP:BLP with grossly inadequate sourcing. Emily Jensen (talk) 17:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong keep . That an article is in bad shape, which is the argument being made here, is not a reason to delete it. If a person isn't notable, an article can be deleted while a bad article on a notable person needs to be improved. Claudia Lynx is clearly notable, she played one of the lead roles in Legion of the Dead (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0441041/) and Lady Magdalene's (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0783538/), alongside numerous appearances in tv-seriers and advertisements. She is clearly no Angelina Jolie by any stretch of immagination, but certainly notable.Jeppiz (talk) 12:14, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, those are not reasons that fall upon wikipedia guidelines for notability. By this logic every aspiring actor/model in Hollywood (and were talking about millions) would have a wikipedia page.  Those are not credible movies, they are not even run of the mill.  "Legion of the Dead" and "Lady Magadalene" I don't think anyone has ever heard of, meaning they were probably extremely low-budget independents that failed to gain distribution, the level of which is something any struggling actor can claim participation.  She did not have the "lead" as you claim in Lady Magdalene either....though these films are so small and lacking of notability that it wouldn't have made a difference anyway.  Minor guest spots on an episode of a TV show over 10 years ago do not make a person notable either.  There are countless more individuals who have made more prominent guest spots and to a greater frequency and no one would think to give them a wikipedia page.
 * Having looked into the matter a bit more, I tend to agree. As it happens, I saw Legion of the Dead (extremely bad movie btw) and thought it to be more widespread than it appears to be. Having looked into the matter, I withdraw my keep-vote.Jeppiz (talk) 10:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Kmehrabi (talk) 19:25, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:53, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:54, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The issue is not the present state of the article, but whether the coverage in WP:RS necessary to meet WP:NOTE and WP:BLP exists at all. Many people have tried to find such references, and have been unsuccessful. IMDB entries do not, by themselves, establish notability. Emily Jensen (talk) 16:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment There are good reviews (but possibly not Wikipedia approved ones) of her performance in Legion, along with her 'opponent' Courtney Clonch. This is a lot more than can be said about the film itself.... To call it a 'B' movie is, by many accounts, an upgrading. Her part 'opposite Martin Sheen' doesn't get mentioned in the Wikipedia article, and therefore is probably minor. (Open to reliable correction.) On the whole, I don't think there is very much of note in her career so far. She probably needs a lucky break to live down the association with Legion. I wish her luck in getting that break. If someone can come up with some good references for achievements, I'll consider coming down off this fence. Peridon (talk) 17:13, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete. WP:BLP Simply an unsourced self-promotional piece. The sources are a personal website, a MySpace page, and an IMDB, anu LA unknown wannabe actor can get make something like that. With all do respect to the person who said "strong keep," a page can be improved, but a persons notability cannot be (not instantly). The point is, there is nothing distinguishing about this person from any of countless actor's and actresses in Los Angeles that have had nothing but a few minor spots few and far between.  By this logic, everyone who spends 2 minutes on an episode of Law and Order should have a wikipedia page.  Also, these are not 'B' movies being discussed. 'B' movies are still produced by major studios.  Her work consists of independent films that never achieved distributions.  Countless such films are made every year, almost all of which, almost no one has ever or will ever hear of unless they have a reason to investigate them as in this discussion. Such spots are so minor that we can make a warranted assumption that they have never earned more attention than the discussion we are currently having in wikipedia, right here, right now.  Kmehrabi (talk) 18:48, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete The filmography presented by Jeppiz in their keep does not meet WP:ENT. The roles offered in the article do not show her meeting WP:ENT. I was not able to locate significant media coverage showing she meets WP:ENT or the WP:GNG. Dloh  cierekim  19:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Having reviewed the prior AFD's two keep votes, I wholly disagree with them. These are not major roles and do not establish meeting WP:ENT. Dloh  cierekim  19:06, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:BLP After investigating the "sources" for this page, it's clear this person does not meet notability standards. This was probably a promotional page set up by the individual or representing management. Pay63 (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC) — Pay63 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete WP:BLP This person is not notable, their sources are not credible. This is blatant self promotion and has no place on wikipedia. Housh (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC) — Housh (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete. No significant coverage in reliable sources. Plainly not enough for a reliable biography (myspace, imdb etc). I'm afraid that reliability, verifiability, notability and WP:BLP together outweigh WP:HOTTIE. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mkativerata. I'd not seen seen that. Dloh  cierekim  19:42, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Pile-on delete IMDb is not a reliable source and if that's all you got, it's not notable. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I echo Mkativerata conclusion: myspace and inmag.com web-pages do not satisfy the substantive documentation requirements. Documentation is lacking in part because this person has not really graduated beyond the "aspiring actress" class. Remove the promotional content of this article and there's little remaining. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 17:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC).
 * Comment Delete. I note that the article makes reference to her as a Persian pop singer. Is it possible there is non-English WP:RS coverage of her? Does anyone read Farsi? I notice, for instance, that there appears to be another entry for her in the Farsi version of Wikipedia (fa:کلاودیا لینکس). If this English-version of the article is deleted, would it be proper to nominate the Farsi version as well? Contrariwise, if the Farsi version is adequately sourced (can't really tell since I don't read the language), wouldn't that mean this article should be preserved as well?—Rnickel (talk) 18:41, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I clicked on the links in the Farsi article and they're the same three WP:NN sources as the English article.—Rnickel (talk) 18:55, 26 April 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.