Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nancy Anne Sakovich


 * 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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) buidhe 03:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Nancy Anne Sakovich

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable BLP. Article only uses IMDB as a source, inappropriately, for years. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 23:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 23:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 23:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 23:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. While there are roles here that could get her over WP:NACTOR if the article were sourced properly, simply listing roles is not in and of itself an exemption from having to have any sources. But on a ProQuest search, the strongest source I can find harshly criticizes her acting skill right in its headline, so I really don't want to use it at all for WP:BLP reasons — if she had 100 sources, it might not be so bad if one of them was a bit unkind about her acting ability, but if the only genuinely solid source she has is openly bashing her talent? And absent that, literally all I can find otherwise is glancing namechecks of her existence rather than coverage that's about her in any non-trivial way. And even if I did overlook my concerns and use the tricky source, it would still take quite a bit more than just one source to actually get her over the bar anyway. Bearcat (talk) 01:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

added some reference. also,on the website added to the External sites section, there's a number of articles about the actress. I did not list more items as they can be already accessed through this website, and most of them focus on the roles not mentioned in the wiki text (they are mentioned in the filmography though),but in case more reference resourse in needed, let me know and I'll try to add more --FascinatingVelvetRose (talk) 14:59, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * References Added
 * Please note that a person's notability is not demonstrated by the self-published production websites of the shows she was in (so sourcing her role in Psi Factor to Psi Factor's own website about itself accomplishes nothing), or by glancing namechecks of her existence in sources that are not about her (so the "Science Fiction Television Series, 1990-2004: Histories, Casts and Credits" book doesn't help either.) To be fair, I will give you credit for catching something I had missed, namely that the two legitimate sources you added (Maclean's and The Globe and Mail) refer to her as "Nancy Sakovich" rather than "Nancy Anne Sakovich", and thus didn't turn up for me because it hadn't occurred to me to try that — but even just getting her over WP:GNG requires more than two sources, so if you really want to salvage the article you still need more sources than this. Bearcat (talk) 17:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * More References  Ok.now I added more sources --FascinatingVelvetRose (talk) 06:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete a non-notable actress and model. Notability is not demonstrated by the added sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: As per WP:HEY. Steps are being taken to improve the article by FascinatingVelvetRose. I don't think there is any huge problem with meeting WP:NACTOR, because the subject has had several significant roles in notable TV series. Also, I think that, whether Bearcat adds the ProQuest source or not, it would go towards WP:NEXIST, anyway. There are lots of results from newspapers.com, too. Dflaw4 (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:28, 17 April 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Sources were added.now the article is also edited to be improved and further match with the added sources.--FascinatingVelvetRose (talk) 05:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 13:54, 24 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.