Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyliegh Curran


 * 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 redirect to Doctor Sleep. With respect to the keep argument, a hit count is not evidence of notability and it appears from the argument that the sources that make up said hit count are inadequate. As for redirect vs. deletion vs. draft, picking redirect so that the content remains preserved in the page history (since the argument is that she could become notable soon) and that readers land on a pertinent article in the meantime. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:03, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Addendum: The redirect target was supposed to be Doctor Sleep (2019 film) not Doctor Sleep, as the former was linked in this discussion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:05, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Kyliegh Curran

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Clearly not a notable actress yet. Her only notable role is for a film not released yet. JDDJS ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 14:11, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  JDDJS  ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 14:11, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  JDDJS  ( talk to me  •  see what I've done ) 14:11, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:01, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment. Possibly notable if the film and stage roles are taken together. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 14:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as a starring actor whose name has appeared in over 129,000 news sources per Google News, which shows notability through the combination of multiple independent sources even though there is not substantial coverage at this point. Before the trailer release, the article averaged 67 views a day. Then it jumped over 4,800% in views to 3,914, reflecting readers' interest in knowing who she is, and this will continue up to the film's release and after it. Information about her previous roles cannot be placed elsewhere on Wikipedia. It is extremely unlikely that the current stub will remain this way. At minimum, the article should be userfied because it will most definitely be brought back with additional coverage. Deleting this article does not serve the readers. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 15:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You do not have enough familiarity with Google. Google will not show you 129,000 results, and there will not have been 129,000 articles.  It does not give me even the comparatively mere 2,100 articles that it claims for me.  That is not how Google actually works.  Google hit counts are a fallacious argument both at AFD and in general elsewhere. Try, instead, demonstrating with citations of reliable sources, that it is possible to write a Wikipedia biography of a child that is in compliance with Wikipedia's content policies.  One has to actually read what the search engines turn up.  I did.  This exemplifies what I found: On the 8th page of results from Google News, the top article was a news article that was not about this person at all, and only matched because of a sidebar containing links to other news articles.  So we've so far got a news article (recycled by several news sources) about a film that devotes two sentences to this person, and the rest to the film, and a fallacious Google hit counting argument that upon examination (and as is far too often the case) is about false counts of things that aren't even sources. Uncle G (talk) 17:47, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * How many results can you find? If it is not 129,000, it is still a lot because every article that talks about the upcoming film mentions that she stars in it, and we see that readers want to know who is this starring actress who is playing one of the three main characters. Is it any less than a thousand in any case? Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 19:22, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not even 100, and they're all the same, about the film and not about this subject. You aren't getting it.  The hit count is a fallacious and uninformed argument to make.  Experience with Google readily shows that it is not a measure of anything, and this is something that is nowadays widely documented about Google.  Try citing sources, as I said.  That's a good argument.  You haven't cited one, yet, though.  Notability is about what is written, not about how much is read.  Uncle G (talk) 04:08, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * DELETE - Fails notability, either WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR. Clear case of WP:TOOSOON. BTW, google 'hits' are 12,900. Somebody added a '0' to the discussion. What's more, when you actually go through them page by page, you will eventually find that there are actually only 167 results. And all of those are trivial mentions. There is a huge base of film newstrivia sites looking for clicks that rush to post something with every press or trailer release. It is important to resist getting caught up in the numbers (even when there are any). I should point out that even the non-RS results aren't about her. They simply provide some variation of: "Curran will portray Abra Stone". Most of these mentions seem to be based off of other trivial mentions (i.e. copy/paste and change an adjective). RS such as UPI, discuss the film but simply include her name among a list of eight actors in the film. And typically, when there is even modest coverage of the movie, the source will say that the star is Ewan McGregor, not the subject — because he is the star. NB, there is not yet any significant coverage because the film is still in production. A BLP requires good sources (and I think there are special concerns when a minor is the subject) and these do not exist yet. ogenstein (talk) 03:38, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Draft as the film is very high profile and she has a major role so it is likely she will receive more substantial coverage in the medium term so draftifying until then seems a good option, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 21:55, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect Actors fails GNG and is a case of TOOSOON. Actor has only 2 credits, one of which is an unreleased film. Doctor Sleep isn't released yet so we have to judge with the current available sources and not speculate. Redirect to Doctor Sleep (for now). HM Wilburt (talk) 15:56, 20 June 2019 (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.