Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica Brooks Grant


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Jessica Brooks Grant

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Disputed prod. Actress has only extremely minor roles, best known as child in a movie that gets killed off right away. No reliable, independent sources with nontrivial mentions to demonstrate notability per our standards. DreamGuy (talk) 21:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Actress meets the criteria of WP:CREATIVE. I have added to the article her filmography which establishes that she has significant roles had multiple notable films and television productions. Wordssuch (talk) 04:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC) Blocked sockpuppet. King of  &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And which of those roles handful of minor roles listed there would be "significant" in any way? Certainly not "additional voices" and etc. If you can come up with an example of a significant role, by all means give details. DreamGuy (talk) 13:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 12:16, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry, TWINKLE stopped working on me in the middle of that one for some reason. Tried to fix it as best I could. DreamGuy (talk) 13:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  15:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep As a "cute" child actress in What Dreams May Come (film) is likely to have been spoken about in the hundreds of reviews of the film. Just a matter of digging.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Hypothetical assumptions that short mentions within reviews about the film itself must exist is not anything like an indication of individual notability. You don't even bother to prove trivial mentions exist when nontrivial mentions in reliable sources is what is needed. A child actress playing a role that gets killed at the start of the movie to drive the plot isn't anything like a notable role, and we need multiple notable roles to justify a Wikipedia article. DreamGuy (talk) 15:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Its a safe bet such exist for a child actress in key scenes in an award winnnig/nominated film. Opinining otherwise is the "hypothetical assumption". In the film, it is the death of ALL major characters and their subsequent interactions as spirits/souls that MAKES the film, so her death is the beginning of this person's role, not the ending. And having looked at the article, I do happen to see multiple roles in a youngster's new career... minor at first as with all actors, but growing into larger parts as her career advanced. Thank you.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Notability must be demonstrated, not assumed. The argument above is simply nonsensical by our notability standards. DreamGuy (talk) 20:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The article needs to be improved, but in my opinion she is an actress in movies that have been released to the public and deserves a page. Quistisffviii (talk) 13:56, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * LOTS of people are actors in movies released to the public. That doesn't mean they all get Wikipedia articles. It'd be nice if the people voting took the time to follow the actual criteria for notability instead of just making side arguments. DreamGuy (talk) 15:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:ENTERTAINER. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 00:19, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin –, who has !voted above, has been indefinitely blocked as a sock puppet of . See Sockpuppet investigations/Azviz/Archive. MuZemike 16:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not a single reliable source describing her; bear in mind that this is a BLP. All of her roles are relatively minor bit parts. Fails WP:ENTERTAINER. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 19:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with AMIB. Delete. Eusebeus (talk) 23:43, 26 April 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.