Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Molly Dunsworth


 * 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.  Jujutacular  talk 00:55, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Molly Dunsworth

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Non-notable per WP:NACTOR, no significant coverage online from WP:Reliable sources, evident WP:Conflict of interest by creator(s) of article. Proposed deletion contested by creator. Top Jim (talk) 19:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  —Top Jim (talk) 19:09, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete pro tem. "She is most known for her starring role in Hobo With a Shotgun where she plays "Abby" along side Rutger Hauer". If/when this film comes out, yes she will probably fit the standards. If she's best known for something not yet finished, let alone released, she fairly obviously doesn't. The film is referenced - none of her other stuff is, and it doesn't look of great note. This is not belittling Molly - she's young and at the start of a career. Many of the greats started in parts they'd not have wanted to remember - or rather other people to remember. Time for the article is when the press outside the town where filming took place take note and start discussing it. I'll expect the article to come back then, and given good sources per WP:RS, we'll welcome it. (Please don't suggest keeping it until then - see WP:CRYSTAL as anything might happen. If references are produced to show her previous parts were indeed notable, that's a different kettle of fish.) Peridon (talk) 20:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball The Eskimo (talk) 22:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice per simply being WP:TOOSOON.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 09:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

``chrisjames14`` She "will" be most well known for Hobo With a Shotgun, globally, when it comes out, yes. Currently she is already well known in Atlantic Canada, specifically, as one of the strongest young female actors, and certainly the most well known. I'm not sure how many people in any given area, need to think she is notable, to be "notable enough" for Wikipedia's standards. In Atlantic Canada, she is certainly notable enough - is Atlantic Canada too small of an area? If it is required that she is known in a larger area; nationally (Canada), or internationally (Canada&USA), then yes, I agree that this article only be put up "after" Hobo With a Shotgun is released. If Atlantic Canada IS a large enough area for one to be notable and famous in, than I still disagree with the proposed deletion of this page, and suggest that it be kept.

She is notable is Atlantic Canada for a number of reasons - reasons that could be discussed and written about on her wiki page, however there currently aren't enough already published web sources to provide references for these facts. That is why all that is currently on her wiki page, is surrounding her work in Hobo With a Shotgun - not because this is all she is "known" for in Atlantic Canada, but because this is all that other media have actually written about. ``chrisjames14`` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisjames14 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I've emboldened Chris's !vote above, and would recommend signing posts with four ~ things. Chris, have a look at those policies. It's not numbers of people - it's coverage to a large extent. If you can show that Molly - not just the film but her herself in person - has been covered by the press on a more than local basis, then please add refs and tell us. We're not anti-Molly. Schmidt above is notorious for spoiling people's fun at AfD by wading in and rescuing sinking articles. If he says 'too soon', you can bet he's been searching. You might have something up your sleeve - if you do (and it's not just your arm...) let us know. "there currently aren't enough already published web sources to provide references for these facts." - doesn't have to be web (although that's easier to check). Newspapers and magazines (bit too soon perhaps for books) also count. Otherwise, we'll welcome her when they are available (and you might find the article already there). Peridon (talk) 20:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete When the subject is best known for something that has not happened, that's a clear indication they are not notable. No prejudice against re-creation should the subject later become notable. Edward321 (talk) 14:03, 18 November 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.