Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marisol Padilla Sánchez


 * 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. This is a WP:BLP article that has remained without reliable sources even after 3 weeks of AfD. Deletion is therefore mandatory. Since there is no consensus as to notability, the article can be restored after being userfied via WP:REFUND and improved with reliable sources.  Sandstein  15:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Marisol Padilla Sánchez

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable actor. Using just IMDB as a source for nearly a decade. Deprodded by another editor who claimed notability, but has not added any sources to back up this claim. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 15:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 15:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 15:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 15:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 15:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. She's not some blip who appeared in one film and then was never seen again. She's a steady character actor who's had roles in over 20 different films and TV series over a long period of over 20 years. Two of those films, L.A. Confidential and Traffic, were nominated for and won multiple Academy Awards. That working history establishes notability. —Lowellian (reply) 15:48, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Playing minor roles in notable films does not indicate notability. Do you have any independent reliable sources that could back up any of the article’s claims? Cardiffbear88 (talk) 16:25, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete we need sources, not a directory listing which is what IMDb is. Being in films that get notice does not have any bearing when the roles are not significant. We need reliable sources, without them the article violates our biography of living people rules. I am begging to think the place where we have the most articles on non-notable people is with articles on actresses and actors. We need sources that are reliable, it is high time we started deleting every article with only IMDb as a source. Wikipedia was not meant to be an IMDb mirror, but back in 2007-2008 a few editors turned it into such, and since then they have blocked attempts to Prod delete these articles. If we are to keep any of these articles they absolutely need sources besides IMDb. This is a much larger and worse situation than the proliferation on non-notable minor characters from the Silmarillion and articles on name drops from the Lord of the Rings that existed on Wikipedia up until less than 6 months ago. Now in 2020 we need to refocus on making Wikipedia reliable, and that means scrapping the hundreds of one sentence intro filmographies sourced only to IMDb we have. A related work I have been doing is reviewing film articles, removing the huge number of redlinks in the cast list and periodically removing the false links to articles that are not on cast members, but on people born years or even decades after the films were made. Many of these articles on films are also only sourced to IMDb. Not every film released in theatres ever is notable, nor is every person who ever was credited on a film (do not get me started on how some of these lists include a whole slew of uncredited appearances), it is tedious work but the number of false cast links I have found is not acceptable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:57, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * John Pack Lambert Sadly the problem is huge. The two backlogs I’m currently working on (Category:Articles sourced only by IMDb and Category:Articles sourced by IMDb) total 3000+ articles, and I would bet that’s just the tip of the iceberg given the fact the tags aren’t included in WP:TWINKLE. I’ve only scratched the surface so far but given the current global situation I’m determined to reduce this substantially over the coming weeks. I should say that I’m only nominating about 10% for deletion - many have plenty of sources but just haven’t been added and haven’t been flagged until now. Thank for you for your support in all of these AfDs. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 21:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep: I'm voting "Weak Keep" at the moment on the basis of the award the subject won for her role in Traffic. There are sources to verify this, which I have applied for at WP:RX and will provide here as soon as I can. Dflaw4 (talk) 06:31, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The first and last sources refer to her award, while the second one (simply a listing) says that she co-starred in Fever (1999 film): here, here and here. I will look for more in-depth coverage, because a weak case could probably be made for WP:NACTOR. Dflaw4 (talk) 07:21, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Given the recent discussion, and at least some policy based keep reasoning, a relist seems worthwhile

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 17:23, 18 April 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: per nosebagbear above, one more time.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Puddleglum 2.0 (How's my driving?) 14:47, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - there are a couple of other actors also from LA Confidential who have articles that are unreferenced apart from IMDb. I know this is a deletion discussion specific to that one, but it's probably worth bearing in mind that whatever decision taken here in the end would potentially also apply to Michael McCleery and Jim Metzler. That's by no means a suggestion that it should be kept - if anything, whilst I am genuinely in two minds about this, I'd probably slightly sway for deletion - but it does bear thinking about. Naypta ☺ &#124; ✉ talk page &#124; 17:37, 26 April 2020 (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.