Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leila Danette


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:24, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Leila Danette

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable minor actress who has played indignificant parts only (eg "Woman #2 in window"; four different parts in different episodes of a series). Fails WP:ENT, which calls for significant roles. I42 (talk) 07:30, 4 March 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite 01:32, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Leila had a significant career from the 80's until 2003, and is made more notable by the fact that she's a centenarian. Silver Buizel (talk) 15:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Where are the references that assert notability? All we have at the moment is imdb (not reliable) and a local news article. I42 (talk) 17:00, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * A search finds those sources. The article's current lack is a reason to add them or tag the article for them... but that lack in the article itself is not an ipso facto reason to toss an improvable article.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:38, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Having a sourcable television and theater career when in her 80s and 90s is definitely notable. . For instance, in a 1980 review of Eden, the New York Times wrote "Leila Danette is a hilarious cross between Little Nell and Nell Gwynd". In 1996 the New York Times reviewed her in Marion X as ""completely endearing as Miss Mary".  With sources available to improve the article, there is no reason to call for its deletion. She meets both WP:ENT and WP:GNG.  I am concerned that a sourced and improvable article was sent to AFD only 3 days after its creation, rather than being tagged for improvements and allowing editors time to address concerns through regular editing. Or has WP:ATD been rendered historical?   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Obviously a notable enough career. Multiple appearances on some shows.  Plus news results of her found.    D r e a m Focus  17:55, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Comment I had to rewrite the entire article since it was directly copied from |Social/Leila_Danette_turns_100.html this cited source. I attempted to leave as much content as as possible in an effort to not disrupt this discussion, but that was a bit difficult as I had to start from scratch.  Pinkadelica ♣  11:02, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Appears to have had a notable enough acting career and has received coverage in publications such as the New York Times, so seems to pass the notability guidelines. -- Big  Dom  20:43, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per above, numerous credits, rewrite and sources et al. -- Banj e  b oi   13:45, 13 March 2010 (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.