Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julie Marcus


 * 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. If userification is desired, ping me. The Bushranger One ping only 18:42, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Julie Marcus

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Delete due to lack of notability in accordance with the topical notability guidelines for actors or the general notability guidelines, which require significant coverage in reliable and independent sources. Best regards,  Cindy  ( talk to me ) 14:40, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 15:26, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


 * reponse: Thanks for the feedback on the Julie Marcus page. I'm not brand new to WIKI, but it has been a while since I've posted and I am using a new account.  Julie is mentioned not only on IMDB  and Rotten Tomatoes, but also mentioned within WIKI for the upcoming cartoon series "Dragons: Riders of Berk".  She was (prior to the bio I added) the only actress listed without a bio page.  I think given her peers with pages and her increased notoriety (not necessarily historical credentials, although she is building an extensive filmography) she qualifies as notable-enough. 216.101.236.254 (talk) 18:48, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not enough good sources, including some IMDb sources. --Nathan2055talk - contribs 21:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. I agree that the sources aren't particularly reliable.  (IMDB is not a useful citation for Wikipedia, and "X has an article so Y should also" is not a useful argument in a deletion discussion -- which is also not "feedback".)  However, I am a little concerned that we are holding North American voice actors to a higher standard than Seiyu and I'd be interested to see what someone with more expertise than I would say.  Ubelowme U  Me  21:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback, everyone! I do understand the notion of not everyone is notable.  And this point may not be best suited for this forum, but I absolutely think that if X has an article, Y should also.  That is because if X has an article and X has to meet a certain criteria, then why isn't Y, which runs in parallel to X, eligible?  Again, I understand that not everyone is notable, and that setting a bar too low is a slippery slope, but I wonder if the scrutiny is too strict.216.101.236.254 (talk) 21:51, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If you compare X to Y to notable subject Z, you tend to drift. That is why every subject is judged on its own, particularly with respect to the availability of reliable sources that cover the subject in depth. VQuakr (talk) 03:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Besides IMDB and some small coverage, she doesn't have much coverage from independent sources. Not enough to clear hurtle of GNG. Jimsteele9999 (talk) 23:56, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - The subject does not appear to meet WP:BASIC or any other applicable notability guidelines. VQuakr (talk) 03:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete this brand new article without prejudice as being TOO SOON. To User:216.101.236.254: The "bar" is set by coverage in reliable sources, not simply listings in databases or inclusion in cast lists. When Ms Marcus has such coverage, the article might be welcome... but at this point in her career it is premature. If article author User:Jdjbj43 wishes it back to continue work in userspace, that would be fine, but it's simply not ready for article space.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q.
 * Delete as per WP:TOOSOON. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete TOO SOON says it all. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:48, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank You for all the great feedback. Particularly WP:TOOSOON. If deleted, I'm confident in increased interest and will attempt a re-submission soon. Jdjbj43 (talk) 06:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Do not 'resubmit'! Ask for a WP:REFUND, it's much easier and you don't loose your work. If you ask for a WP:REFUND now, you can add sources as they become avaliable. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:48, 23 July 2012 (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.