Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iris Law


 * 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. One person argued to keep, based on meeting WP:NMODEL, but failed to provide any specific evidence, i.e. sources, to back that up. The suggestion to (re)create a redirect seems reasonable, but since only one person mentioned it, I'm going to leave it out. If you want to create the redirect on your own, that's fine. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:42, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Iris Law

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

As per WP:NMODEL models must have had 1) Significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions I am no expert in the modelling business but I can only see one appearance in Illustrated People which is a publication that isn't on Wikipedia, an appearance in a 2017 brochure, and three Burberry adverts two years ago.  2) A large fan base or a significant "cult" following I cannot see any indication this person has a fanbase of any note, that seems to exist more with her father Jude as a famous actor. 3) A unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment It is clear from the article she has made no unique, prolific or innovative contributions in life. The only notable incident in her life so far was the ecstasy hospitalization at age two, which would be better served in the articles on Jude Law and Sadie Frost's personal lives. So far, one appearance for Burberry isn't a "significant role" and WP:NMODEL requires multiple appearances in such noted publications.  Not sufficiently notable, therefore I recommend deletion until her modelling career takes off.  I note that User:PamD has argued against deletion. I would be interested to hear the thoughts of editors, this article fails WP:NMODEL and there is not a "range of sources" about this person. There is a complete absence of information about this person on the internet aside from one Burberry campaign and the fact they are the daughter of Jude Law. Clearly this is a sign that the person is best discussed in Jude's own article until they become notable in their own right.Llemiles (talk) 23:16, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Llemiles (talk) 23:16, 4 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep: regardless of NMODEL there is sufficient independent reliable coverage in several different magazines over years from 2015 to present to meet general notability. Pam  D  23:24, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:36, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:36, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:36, 4 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not meet WP:NMODEL and is another one of those vanity pages without much encyclopedic interest. — Sago tree spirit  (talk) 00:46, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I created this as a redirect to Jude_Law, so if this is found non-notable, there is a clear WP:ATD Alerting the article's creator, . Boleyn (talk) 07:57, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete As stated, article does not meet WP:NMODEL in any way. Amynewyork4248 (talk) 01:23, 8 October 2019 (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.