Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madeleine Fairley


 * 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. Davewild (talk) 09:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Madeleine Fairley

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable actress Fails GNG - Considering she's been in 2 very notable films (Kidulthood and Adulthood) I'm very surprised there's nothing on her - I managed to find one source which I've added but other than that I can't find anything - Even looked on Highbeam but got nothing. – Davey 2010 Talk 17:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. – Davey 2010 Talk 17:21, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. – Davey 2010 Talk 17:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. – Davey 2010 Talk 17:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Keep She is notable enough to warrant inclusion here. That she is included in the International Movie Database and is well known enough that Google has given her a recognition box under her name sufficiently establishes notability. Ormr2014 (talk) 23:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
 * - IMDb isn't a reliable source and having a "recognition box" means bugger all thus your !vote as it stands is invalid, Please provide legitimate sources that establish notability. – Davey 2010 Talk 01:02, 8 May 2015 (UTC)


 * You should do some research instead of simply nominating the article for deletion. . There is more than enough material readily available to anyone with even the slightest inclination to look. Even you admit that she was in "2 very notable films". Regarding your assertion about the IMDB, you cannot even have a page on there without having some level of verifiable notability.  Ormr2014 | Talk
 * - Are you completely blind as if you look above you will see I have searched on 2 sites and 30+pages, Those Google Results are all irrelevant - Don't you think if they were relevant I would've used them?!, IMDb isn't a reliable source whatsoever - IMDb is free to edit like Wikipedia so it's not a source, Again invalid vote - As I said right above Please provide legitimate sources that establish notability which so far you haven't done. – Davey 2010 Talk 02:27, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not blind at all. And as for what you would or wouldn't do, I don't have a clue, but I do see a lot of people proposing to delete all sorts of things that really have no business being deleted and from my perspective, this is such a case.  Ormr2014 | Talk
 * - Well I'm hardly gonna lie about looking am I ... As you'll see from my edits here I actually planned on sourcing it but how can one source an article if there is none? ...., If they don't meet notability requirements they have every right to be deleted, I would thank you on providing sources but you've not listed any which clearly indicates you haven't or can't find anything so thus proves my point - No evidence of notability to warrant an article. – Davey 2010 Talk 02:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

How's This:

Filmography
 * Kidulthood (2006) as Claire
 * Adulthood (2008) as
 * Dude Wheres Gary's Finger (2010) as Gaz 'Fingertron' Hardy

Television work
 * Drake And Josh (2004; 1 episode) as Mandy
 * Casualty (2008; 1 episode) as Amber Collins
 * West 10 LDN (2008) (television series pilot) as Lillian
 * Missing (2009; 1 episode) as Kaz Gutenburg Project
 * |0/Madeleine-Fairley/ TCM outlines her filmography
 * Listed on Theiapolis
 * Mentioned in the book, The Nicholas Hoult Handbook
 * Simply searching "Madeleine Fairley" pulls up over 5,000 results While many are certainly not worth listing, many are relevant.

There is more than enough to deem this article "notable". That her filmography includes not only two major motion pictures and a smaller film, but also spans 4 television programs establishes enough "notability" to be encyclopedic. How you cannot see this is beyond me.  Ormr2014 | Talk
 * 1st is a Wikipedia mirror, 2 and 3 aren't reliable sources, 4 doesn't work and again 5 is useless ... so again no notability, Please read WP:Reliable sources, With all respect I've been here 2-3 years so I know alot more than you ..... Give up and !vote Delete it'll save us both time. – Davey 2010 Talk 03:27, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I've found the the book but it looks to have mostly been copied from here and elsewhere so again not really source. – Davey 2010 Talk 03:36, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually,, I've been editing on Wikipedia for over 5 years under 3 different accounts, so I'm going to disagree with you on the last point. And as for the first source it's obvious you didn't read it or even look at it; it's not remotely even similar to Wikipedia, much less a "mirror". You make a lot of claims about the sources, as if you've done a scholarly analysis or something. How did you determine they are "not reliable", and stop pointing to the Wikipedia guidelines, it's a cop out. Explain what makes these particular sources unreliable per Wikipedia's policies. And how exactly did you determine the book has been "mostly copied from elsewhere"; please give a reference to the original work.
 * I've said my piece and I'm going to leave it at that. Others can decide whether or not to include it here...  Ormr2014 | Talk


 * So you've been here for 5 years yet with all respect you're absolutely clueless as to what's reliable sources and what isn't, The first was copied from Wikipedia - Look at the edits before mine - Completely the same ... It was copied word for word and again how you can't see that is honestly beyond me, Well IMDB isn't per WP:Citing IMDB as it's a known fact IMDB isn't a reliable source, The rest aren't at all and anyone who's edited here for a long time would  know that, The book was copied from here and elsewhere that's plainly obvious, Others won't include it because they're not reliable sources and they don't establish notability, BTW I apologize for constantly hatting it's just this is becoming very big. – Davey 2010 Talk 14:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Where at in Wikipedia was this filmography copied from? Certainly not the article you're proposing to delete, as this article did not even list her television appearances.

As for the rest of what you stated, when writing articles or adding citations myself, I have tried to use only scholarly, news or educational sources. This is my own personal choice and has nothing to do with any policies here. I only recently began looking over the AFD articles and I admit I didn't know about Wikipedia's policy concerning the IMDB. I work for a company that does movie and music productions and I know it's not a simple matter to get on the IMDB so I assumed this gave credibility. But regardless, I still hold my opinion that the article should remain. This woman is not some fly-by-night actress; she's been in two major motion pictures, one minor film, several television shows and I've seen many other people who've done much less in Wikipedia without so much as the slightest bit of protest. Ormr2014 (talk) 23:14, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * - I'm not ganna argue - You're entitled to your opinions and to be frank we both have better things to do than to keep bickering over this, You feel it should be kept ... I disagree ... But the world turns :)
 * I apologize for calling you clueless as that was rather uncalled for and pretty much pointless - There's things on this place I'm still clueless with myself so having a go at you wasn't helpful so I've struck it out, Anyway thanks & happy editing :) – Davey 2010 Talk 23:22, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * You didn't need to apologize, but I do appreciate it. I'm Irish in every bit of the stereotypical way; I'm arrogant, hard-headed, extremely opinionated and I often get irritated when my opinions/thoughts are questioned. I try to keep that mindset out of my editing here, but believe me when I say there have been more than a couple of times when I let my emotions get the best of me and I said things that were best left unsaid!
 * In any event, you're absolutely right about this article; it isn't worth dragging on any more. You take care. Ormr2014 (talk) 23:38, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * - Well I do because I was a bit of a dick, Haha you me both - It's very easy to let your emotions get in the way here hell like yourself I've said things that I shouldn't of said, it's all too too easy,
 * Thanks and you take care too, Happy editing :), – Davey 2010 Talk 23:50, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:35, 14 May 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete the one and only reference isn't primarily about her, just a mention in a cast list. Doesn't appear to have the substiantial coverage from reliable sources needed for a BLP. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:00, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:30, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can't find a single article about her. FYI IMDB is not an indication of notability - *I* have a profile on IMDB!! All you have to do is be credited in a movie for anything, even as crew or "thanks to" etc.  —Мандичка YO 😜 06:53, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
 * redirect to Kidulthood Govindaharihari (talk) 06:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Sometimes reading these responses, you just have to laugh. Quick question: does everyone here enjoy being redundant and repeating everything everyone else said? I know the IMDB is not considered a reliable source. I didn't when I wrote my above remark, but I have since come across Wikipedia's position on the IMDB. If that wasn't enough to convince me, more than adequately made the point, making the following statement by  about the IMDB redundant and unnecessary.


 * In any event, I have tried to find sources that are reliable under Wikipedia's standards and have failed miserably. Thus my initial vote to keep has been withdrawn and I now affirm the article should go.  Ormr2014 | Talk 12:30, 21 May 2015 (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.