Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica Wallenfels (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 keep. The general consensus is that the article should be cleaned up instead of deleted, and indeed has been done to some extent per WP:HEY. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:10, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Jessica Wallenfels

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article seems to be about a non-notable actress that appears to have already been deleted once because the creater copied the content from another source. The subject's main notability is that she appeared in two episodes of an American television series (Twin Peaks) as a child actress in 1990. Appeared as an extra in two other films and in one independent film in 2004 and is currently an artistic director of a non-profit organization in Portland, Oregon. Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG (greatly) in my opinion. ExRat (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2021 (UTC) ExRat (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:16, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Women-related deletion discussions. ExRat (talk) 23:39, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Television-related deletion discussions. ExRat (talk) 00:08, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the People-related deletion discussions. ExRat (talk) 01:28, 18 January 2021 (UTC) (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Oaktree b (talk) 02:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Her role in Twin Peaks may be small but it’s notable and the character has cult status, especially in the pilot episode. Entertainment Weekly even picked her role as one of "The 30 best things about the Twin Peaks pilot". (https://ew.com/tv/twin-peaks-30th-anniversary-pilot/) (no. 24) Regularly referenced in TV and Twin Peaks retrospectives. I could see someone viewing the pilot and coming to Wiki to look her up as I did. Her two episodes are both famous David Lynch ones and there are newsprint articles about her. Role in cult movie Dogfight too. Her later career as a choreographer is not without note either. She’s staged some impressive productions and not just in Oregon, and nationally, in Los Angeles and off-Broadway in New York, including at Mark Taper Forum in Los Angeles New York’s Beacon Theatre . For example, in 2017 she directed "Appropriate”, at The Beacon Theatre in New York City, a play about racism and white privilege, which was written by Branden Jacobs-Jenkins. The play got write ups about tackling race, for example, but there are several notable stage productions and she has very impressive theatre and academic credentials overall. Other examples is that she co-directed Everybody_(play) and was the choreography on Chay Yew's play A Beautiful Country at the Mark Taper Forum, and even staged a production of Van Morrison's Astral Weeks noted on that page. There might even be better examples, but those are just a few. Plenty of news sources and theatre mentions in Google News, many are Oregon-based but several are national, mentioned in American Theatre, etc. Citations on the page are strong and it links to some other notable pages. Note too that the article was never previously deleted. It was initially flagged for copyright but I spent several hours rewriting it and put a ton of work into this article. I think it reads well now and is well sourced. Her cult TP role plus theatre credits and citations/sources should give enough notability and cult status to pass WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE. (Article creator.) HistoricalAccountings (talk) 14:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Nearly all of her stage work is in regional theatre. Her tiny role in the 1991 film Dogfight is literally as "arcade girl". She had two appearances in a television series 30 years ago and among the other "30 best things about the Twin Peaks pilot" in the Entertainment Weekly article you referenced are: #11 The dancing guy in the high school, #28 Lucy's doughnut smorgasbord, #7 The Briggs family kitchen, #4 Audrey changing into her high heels at school, and #1 The bird in the opening credits. The claim that "citations" in the article are strong is not true; there are complete sections without any references. The fact that this article links to other pages is because you have recently inserted her name into other articles. ExRat (talk) 15:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Reply - I've tried to address all points and concerns raised, as follows:
 * I think I only added her name to Dogfight per sources and Tacoma/Washington pages. It was already on TP pages and Morrison page, I just linked to it.
 * It shouldn't matter if the show is 30 years old, it's remained an iconic cult classic and was spun off into movies and other media even and was revived in 2017 (without Wallenfells but she could return yet in another season), still discussed in popular culture and academia, and is likely to return again.
 * Entertainment Weekly did not pick everything in the pilot or every cast member and character (those other things you mentioned may sound or may be implied to be trivial, but they're not - they're all really iconic elements of the show's famous mise-en-scene), but it doesn't matter what else they referenced only that they didn't list every character but did choose Wallenfels's character.
 * Both episodes she appears in are feature-length and famous, 2 of only 5 directed by Lynch himself (pilot and Season 2 premiere), and one was even a movie on VHS in Europe. They're not just any 2 episodes.
 * Much of her theatre work is regional, yes, but not all of it as I've noted, and some of those plays she directed are noteworthy and they or their playwrights have their own pages.
 * I maintain her significant regional and national theatre work combined with cult TP status and numerous sources warrants her page. I've listed out all I can think of for now (Edit - expanded this reply and I've added some more sources), so will let you all come to a consensus. Couldn't a {notability} tag been added to the article instead? It would have sufficed here, to give more time to gather sources, rather than jumping to this deletion attempt. Also, the last speedy one also shouldn't count or be mentioned as it was unrelated issue, quickly rewritten and resolved. HistoricalAccountings (talk) 15:54, 18 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. It's been a while since I've been on AfD, but I've never seen an article with as many substantive references up here before. If it was just her acting stuff it would be a tougher decision, but her career in theater seems to plainly justify the article. Ab e g92 contribs 20:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Substantive references? Have you looked at them? Most of them are about Twin Peaks, where she is merely name-checked, and that's all. The others are from regional theatre booklets and websites (like this, as an example), and again, are nearly all just name-checks without any sort of substantial information about the subject whatsoever. Then there are sites like imdb (5 credits: one for Twin Peaks, one for a bit part as "Protestor #1", another bit part as "Arcade girl", another without any role listed), her own personal site, a contact site for her job as public relations and marketing specialist at Norris Beggs & Simpson Cos. listed at the Portland Business Journal (pay four bucks to view it), more sites like this that merely name-check. Then there is this?? Flooding an article with (mostly really horrible) references that simply state the subject's name and/or profession is hardly substantial referencing. ExRat (talk) 23:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment There's also references to major publications and respected academic and theatre journals: University of Portland, Oregon ArtsWatch, AMERICAN THEATRE, BroadwayWorld, New York Times, Variety, LA Times, Willamette Week, Entertainment Weekly, Limelight Editions, Theatre Communications Group, and The Beacon. You've cherrypicked and highlighted a couple of weaker references. The other 30+ are much stronger. Yes, because she's a choreographer/director some of the articles do only mention her briefly, the reviews focusing more on the actors, but she's still notably referenced, and a lot of them are much more detailed, praising her direction in detail and praising her addressing racism and tackling other issues.
 * Again, I maintain her significant regional and national theatre work combined with cult television status warrants her inclusion.
 * Furthermore, I'm not - at this stage - now entirely convinced this discussion is entirely objective.
 * I still think a simple {notability} tag could have been added to the article and would have sufficed here, to give more time to gather sources, rather than jumping to this deletion attempt. The last speedy attempt also shouldn't be mentioned as in my opinion it sways opinion and doesn't really qualify this as a "2nd nomination" as it was an unrelated (to notability) issue, quickly rewritten and resolved.
 * HistoricalAccountings (talk) 23:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Again, none of those references are at all substantive whatsoever. Nearly all are passing mentions in articles that aren't even about her; many of which simply mention her name. I am sorry that you feel as though I am not being objective. That simply isn't the case. I think have stated my issues rather clearly. ExRat (talk) 01:37, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment The way you type "nearly all" and bold and italicize all is one example of language that doesn't feel objective. I'm not accusing you of anything but find your repeated insistence strange, especially as soon as someone says Keep you leap in combatively to strongly try to discredit their vote/opinion. In turn, I then feel I must defend the article. Re: sources - they are all about her, productions she directed or appeared in. Yes, some articles are mentions, some are more detailed. As I said above "because she's a choreographer/director some of the articles do only mention her briefly, the reviews focusing more on the actors, but she's still notably referenced, and a lot of them are much more detailed, praising her direction in detail and praising her addressing racism and tackling other issues." I still feel there was no need for AFD here, but a page tag or discussion on the talk page. I really think we should both step aside and either let the closer decide or others weigh in. HistoricalAccountings (talk) 01:50, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , I am going through the references, one at a time. The sixth reference I checked, Fall play "Appropriate" to address racism and white privilege, is 17 paragraphs long, and six of those paragraphs address Wallenfels.  Why shouldn't we think that means that your claim that "none of those references are at all substantive whatsoever" was either a wild exagerration, or shows that you did not actually thoroughly check all the references.  When an article has lots of references they don't have to ALL be detailed.  So, please be more careful.  Geo Swan (talk) 18:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , DramaWatch: Goal-oriented theater at Portland Playhouse is 16 paragraphs long, 8 of which address Wallenfels. Geo Swan (talk) 19:20, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Thank you for going through and checking the references, Geo Swan. If you think any need to be changed or removed, please go ahead or let me know. -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 22:17, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep per discussion and adequate sourcing. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: This article contains no sources asserting subject has directed a play at NYC's Beacon Theater; source "The Beacon" is the U of Portland student newspaper and it makes no such Broadway-bound claim in the cite provided. All three provided sources say this was mounted at the Mago Hunt center in Portland. Choreography at the Mark Taper Forum is impressive, but no Broadway directing credits here. BusterD (talk) 20:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Thank you for clarifying this, BusterD. Have updated talk above and left as strikethrough. Beacon error was mine due to similar name. Her regional stagework is in Portland and other places in Oregon, and much of her national stagework seems to be in Los Angeles with some off-Broadway New York productions too and Seattle and around Washington.-- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 21:15, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment: Just to point out again, nominator titled page incorrectly. This is not a second AFD nomination. Page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jessica_Wallenfels doesn't exist. Previous nom was only a speedy tag, which was removed and resolved once article was rewritten due to potential copyright. I left a note on talk page per helpdesk advice. -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 22:04, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm not sure if this is allowed (and I know it's after the time), but if it is I nominate this for a speedy close. It's been open for 10 days now, with only one delete "per nom" with no explanation. The rest are keeps or comments, more keeps than deletes even if you exclude the nominator and me (article creator). I don't think it should ever have been nominated. A simple notability tag and talk page discussion would have sufficed. The nominator mistakenly mistitled this and submitted it as a "2nd nomination" when it's only first (helpdesk told me previous speedy tag/copyright doesn't count). As another user pointed out above, the nominator also failed to check all the references (40+ on the page). I really think at this stage this should be withdrawn or speedily closed as Keep, though I respect closer's decision - this is only my suggestion based on all of the above. Thank you. I really do feel Wallenfels has several claims to notability - career as child actress/Twin Peaks cult status AND later career in choreography/stage direction - which makes her an interesting and notable figure.-- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 19:24, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. You don't get to vote twice. It is against Wikipedia policy. I also did WP:BEFORE and did, in fact, check the references. The two "substantive" references mentioned above by Geo Swan are articles in local publications (University of Portand's The Beacon and Oregon Artswatch) about two plays performed in regional theatre (Appropriate at the Margo Hunt theatre, and The Wolves at the Portland Playhouse). The focus of both articles is on the plays, not Wallenfels, and are hardly "substantial" as each consists of brief interviews with Wallenfels (and others) about the productions and largely not about Wallenfels herself. I understand that you are invested in keeping the article, but can you please stop belaboring the same points? ExRat (talk) 22:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: "I understand that you are invested in keeping the article, but can you please stop belaboring the same points?" Likewise. There are no strong arguments to delete this article and it feels like you're trying to deflect from the fact you didn't check references and incorrectly nominated this, plus miscategorized it as a 2nd nom. It's not a second vote, just a suggestion. The references are fine. And may I suggest you retitle the article if you aren't going to withdraw it, as previously explained it's not a "2nd nomination" per helpdesk's assessment. -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 22:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. You literally have voted twice in this discussion. ExRat (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. It was a cumulative suggestion, not an attempt to lodge two votes. It's the same username, so the closer could not interpret as an attempt to trick anyone, and your continued insistence is again questionable, as is your objectivity as I've noted before. -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 00:38, 28 January 2021 (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.