Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julie Engelbrecht


 * 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 non-admin closure as Keep - nominator withdrawal. Night of the Big Wind talk  17:19, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Julie Engelbrecht

 * – ( View AfD View log )

non-notable, fails WP:NACTOR Night of the Big Wind  talk  16:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:30, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 16:18, 6 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  — Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:46, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per meeting WP:NACTOR. The article about HER at the German Wikipedia (translated) indicates that productions currently redlinked at en.Wikipedia are notable enough, even if only to Germany... and a production or actress determinable as notable to Germany is perfectly fine for en.Wikipedia. What we do do when after eliminating false positives and finding non-English coverage in books and news sources, is to address systemic bias by working on translating sources so we can improve the article. On it now.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * LOL, first you expand the article big time, and then you start waving with the systemic bias-flag. There is no way a systemic bias from my side. The article that I nominated was an extremely short article. By now, it is already much more, but it suffers from a severe lack of sources. But you make progress, keep up the good work. Night of the Big Wind  talk  00:36, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I began with an expansion as I researched, as I far prefer addresssing issues if I am able, before offering a comment. And as an example that I recognize that my efforts do not always result in a "keep" comment, I did a similar expansion for the article Doug Roberts (actor) before commenting in a different fashion at that other article's AFD. And I fully agree... the "bias" is absolutely and in no way yours... but is simply one recognized as a weakness inherent in our system. And even though notability is found through suitable topic sources being available and not through them being "in" an article as citations, I'm still on it... and will use available sources as citations as I get them translated. Patience, please. :)   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:30, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There is a systemetic bias in Wikipedia, but that is pro-American and/or pro-English-language. Recently an article was considered non-notable because the nominator could not read the Dutch sources. :-) Night of the Big Wind  talk  12:23, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Request for speedy close as keep Article shows now that the actress will pass WP:NACTOR by a wide enough margin. Night of the Big Wind  talk  12:23, 9 December 2011 (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.