Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mem Kennedy


 * 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. None of the references in the article are reliable secondary sources, and has yet to star in any significant way in any notable productions. No prejuduce against recreation when she achieves notability. The Bushranger One ping only 07:58, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Mem Kennedy

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:UPANDCOMING but not yet notable actress. Google reveals no sources except her own website and IMDB. Fails WP:NACTOR. ukexpat (talk) 20:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  — ukexpat (talk) 20:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

I believe that her current reason to be on Wikipedia is her success on you tube as an actress, this is a field i believe is commonly overlooked. she stared in 8 dates and the wonder full world of zoe which now has more than two million views and over 22,000 members subscribed. This coupled with her many appearances in film make her suitable to be on Wikipedia. She has been a part of may things that have there own Wikipedia pages and she has also worked with people who have there own Wikipedia page. The fact that she doesn't turn up many results on Google doesn't mean that she is "up and comeing". Repisme (talk) 20:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * As it stands, her own website is not sufficient to demonstrate notability per WP:BIO, which is the guideline for biographies. By all means find and cite some reliable sources if there are any. – ukexpat (talk) 20:54, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

More references have been added to the article at your request Repisme (talk) 23:17, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The effort is appreciated, but please read WP:RS to see what kind of sources were being requested. No one doubts her existance, but having a short career and no media coverage is seen as WP:TOOSOON.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:34, 4 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:GNG. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:48, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —Grahame (talk) 02:12, 9 October 2011 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 00:05, 17 October 2011 (UTC)


 * keep, Mem meets the requirements of an entertainer listed on the notably (people) Wikipedia article. She has been is several films and many you tube videos. She has a large fan base and has a unique contribution to the entertain industry by starting her Americana acting career by making you tube videos. Repisme (talk) 04:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of mutiple significant roles in notable productions. Parts in notable productions are minor, other productions are not notable. That many subscribers does not = a large fan base. Nothing unique about making youtube videos. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:32, 20 October 2011 (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.