Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate Oxley


 * 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. Those in favor of keeping cite only WP:ENTERTAINER's first point about "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." At the least, the notion of "significance" is never explicated by those in the keep camp, and no secondary sources demonstrating significance are offered, which is necessary per WP:NRVE (or WP:V more generally). The arguments of delete commenters about the lack of sources and the failure to meet the GNG are not addressed by those in favor of keeping the article. Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 10:14, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Kate Oxley

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unsourced BLP. Contested Prod. No significant coverage found. Michig (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:ENTERTAINER. She has played a significant role in various notable series.  This includes her role as Misaki Kirihara in the Darker than Black series, and the main character of Momo in Peach Girl.  I added in references showing she did voice commentary on her roles there on the DVD.   D r e a m Focus  20:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Surely she just did the English versions of these series, not the originals. I think this is stretching WP:ENTERTAINER somewhat.--Michig (talk) 20:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Its a cartoon. Which voice actor did the role first is not relevant.  The voice actors have to put in the same emotions as a regular actor does, it taking work.   D r e a m Focus  00:53, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Yeah, dubbing actors don't get to claim notability from their films unless the dub itself is independently notable. Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 00:35, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --  D r e a m Focus  00:54, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: (i) little evidence of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" & (ii) little evidence that participation in derivative works such as foreign-language redubs (which are generally not themselves independently notable) confers any notability, so would not appear to meet WP:ENTERTAINER. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 04:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * " little evidence that participation in derivative works such as foreign-language redubs (which are generally not themselves independently notable) confers any notability, so would not appear to meet WP:ENTERTAINER." You don't know much about anime dubbed by popular anime companies do you? Do some Google searches for the dubbed versions sometime. Joe Chill (talk) 15:25, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:20, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This article has been nominated for rescue.  D r e a m Focus  21:17, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of notable biographical sources. Both Yahoo! and Google didn't find any sources that support this Wikipedia biography. SwisterTwister   talk  06:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as per • Gene93k. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:06, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Gene93k didn't comment in this AFD.  D r e a m Focus  16:24, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Based on my mis-attribution I've taken another look and checked all the references. Only one reference seems to be primarily about the subject, and that's a fan-built site that's primarily a compilation of references to minor references to the subject. Categorical fail to meet WP:GNG in my view. Not close.  Stuartyeates (talk) 10:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Based on my mis-attribution I've taken another look and checked all the references. Only one reference seems to be primarily about the subject, and that's a fan-built site that's primarily a compilation of references to minor references to the subject. Categorical fail to meet WP:GNG in my view. Not close.  Stuartyeates (talk) 10:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes WP:ENTERTAINER. Northamerica1000 (talk) 10:08, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not a vote, and bald assertions are likely to be discounted by the closing administrator. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 10:49, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That was not a vote, it was a statement that it should be kept since it passes the notability guidelines at WP:ENTERTAINER. And administrators that just ignore anyone that disagrees with their personal opinions, often find their rulings overthrown at deletion review.   D r e a m Focus  11:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * When you make a claim without any substantiation, it's a vote. Where are the sources that show that this person passes the mark? - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 11:20, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." I mentioned that in my statement above.  Should they have to copy and paste the same thing and just repeat what someone else has said already?  If you were the main character for a notable series, then obviously that counts as a significant role, as does being one of the main characters in another notable series(see my keep reasoning for specific examples).   D r e a m Focus  11:32, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I seem to be in disagreement with a bunch of people here on what it takes to pass WP:ENTERTAINER. She has performed a few major roles in the U.S. versions of anime, and the U.S. releases of those anime have gotten significant coverage in reliable sources (for instance, she played the main character in the U.S. release of Peach Girl, and the U.S. release was reviewed by reliable sources like Anime News Network and Mania.com).  As someone who has played major roles in notable works, she passes WP:ENTERTAINER.  The suggestions that the coverage must focus on the dub or must go above and beyond what would be sufficient for a Japanese voice actor has no basis in policy that I can see. Calathan (talk) 13:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Passes WP:ENT. I don't see where it says that dubbed shows don't count in the sentence, "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." The dubbed anime is notable as well not just the original. Joe Chill (talk) 15:22, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Because the "entertainer" shortcut so abused here is but a small section of the page Notability (people). The first section on that page is the basic criteria of having "if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." The next section down,the "Additional criteria" section, says "People who meet any of the following standards are likely to meet the over-arching general notability criteria." [Emphasis mine]].  Just waving hands and saying "meets entertainer" does not satisfy the accepted inclusion criteria.  Find some real sources actually about this person. - Aaron Brenneman (talk) 09:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, yeah. Whatever you say. Joe Chill (talk) 11:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * You added in that bit a few weeks ago, in your attempt to make all secondary guidelines pointless. There is no consensus to add it.  I just removed it again and started a discussion about it.   So far everyone who has commented is against you adding that.   D r e a m Focus  09:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I recommend people the "Additional criteria" section (under WP:BASIC), since WP:ENT is dependent on that section. I also recommend people note, should questions of ANN's encyclopedia's accuracy come up, the separate listing for what we claim to be Kate Oxley's real name. Whoops.--joe deckertalk to me 04:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * That section keeps changing to say opposite things back and forth these past few weeks. Go by what its said for years, not what a small number of recent people have been trying to make it say.   D r e a m Focus  09:47, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * (I added an indent for clarity here, my apologies if that's a problem.) As I mentioned over at the Orion Pitts discussion, I accept and had been unaware that the wording there has changed, however, I dont read either wording as having a particularly different meaning when taken in view of WP:NRVE. Unlike Orion, though, there is some (from my view) reliable sourcing in this article, which is why I'm not contributing a !vote to the discussion here, simply a comment. --joe deckertalk to me 17:24, 10 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - A notable dub would be Sailor Moon, where things were changed so substantially that there were plot points that differed, and it had a major impact as an English-language franchise. In this case, Oxley's parts in a notable series were mainly as a bit player, and the others are only notable in particular circles, so there's a question of substantial coverage and independent sourcing as well, if interpreted broadly. MSJapan (talk) 05:39, 11 August 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.