Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lorri Bagley


 * 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. The consensus to keep was near unanimous. The article was improved during the listing period demonstrating the subject's notability. (non-admin closure) Mkativerata (talk) 19:55, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Lorri Bagley

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete. This is a non-notable actress which fails general notability guidelines. A few bit roles listed on IMDb and what amounts to a mirror site are insufficient. JBsupreme (talk) 18:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC) Keep Article has been improved and now cites appropriate reference material to establish notability. betsythedevine (talk) 17:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Significant role in major network TV program (in 1999-2000, back when network TV was a big deal). --GRuban (talk) 19:49, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Also two awards: Star on the Horizon Award at the Ft. Lauderdale International Film Festival, and B-Movie Actress of the Year.--GRuban (talk) 00:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't see how this passes WP:N nor has enough references for a BLPNefariousski (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as subject has received coverage in reliable sources. Their lack as references is a concern, but their availability is a reason to fix through regular editing... not to delete.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note I have begun adding sources and invite assistance.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Clicking Google news search up top, I find this person gets plenty of coverage.  D r e a m Focus  18:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: It appears article now has sources, good work.  Hey, JB, you are darn efficient around here, you could probably save tons of these articles you are prodding in the BLP Death March with your skills.--Milowent (talk) 18:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Obviously. Hard to accept that nom wasn't readily able to see dozens of GNews hits thus easily negating any GNG concerns. -- Banj e  b oi   06:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Sufficient inline citations, sufficient information about her. Certainly a photo would be a nice addition. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:01, 25 January 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.