Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Molly Hager


 * 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. No evidence presented of notability under WP:GNG, nor claims under WP:ACTOR joe deckertalk to me 21:22, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Molly Hager

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

A theatre actor. Has appeared in some off Broadway plays. Refs given are reviews of the plays and not about her. The play, that the refs come from, just opened in the past week. Unable to find her at IBDB or ITDb. Unable to find refs except for theatre reviews. Prod was contested as "deprod, no reason given" Bgwhite (talk) 22:48, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 17:43, 6 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - I can find no significant coverage about Molly Hager. I can find her listed in cast credits, and mentioned in reviews, but the reviews do not provide the significant coverage needed to establish notability.  The article does contain references to reviews but they are somewhat misleading.  The NY Post review is used as a citation that she is part of the cast for Fat Camp.  It does establish this fact, but the review itself provides no significant coverage about Hager or her performance.  The article points to a Village Voice review that calls her "super" without providing a link to an online version.  I found it here, and literally, the word "super" consists of the entirety of coverage about Hager in the review.  The article also refers to a Theatremania review calling her performance "tough and tender".  If one reads the article, one finds the words refer to the character of Taylor and not Hager's performance.  I was unable to find an online version of the New York magazine review which purportedly called her "sensational" but given the way the other reviews have been used, I suspect that it is blown out of proportion. The article looks like the handiwork of a publicist. -- Whpq (talk) 13:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → B  music  ian  02:00, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, → Σ  τ  c . 01:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per Whpq. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:48, 29 May 2012 (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.