Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anee Icha

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. Vanamonde (Talk) 09:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anee Icha

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This actress and "personality" does not meet notability criteria for

WP:TOOSOON. Bringing it here for the community to weigh in on. Netherzone (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, and Nigeria. Netherzone (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are SO many articles similar to this created by the same user recently.
~Styyx^Talk? 23:30, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm going to take it to ANI, they've had more than enough chances to abide by our notability and BLP policies. PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:42, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Content citing Bella Naija have been removed. There are still about 9 other references from punch, nation and vanguard ( all newspapers).the article is notable because Anne Icha has starred in many films and one of the popular one is Namaste Wahala, a bolly and Nollywood movie.

Aside that She is one of the female celebrities that held meeting at Lagos on ways to solve problem affect women in the movie industry which is the june edition of the Inkblot Women in Film (IWIF) lunch. (All well sourced).Tesleemah (talk) 07:24, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tesleemah, all four sources are simply name-checks with no editorial content. Simple mentions of her name are considered trivial, and do not count as Significant Coverage. This is how our guidelines describe significant coverage: "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. The book-length history of IBM by Robert Sobel is plainly non-trivial coverage of IBM. Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton,[2] that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band. Do you see how that is very different than the sources in the article? Simply being in a film does not make a person automatically notable, it is what actors/actresses do - it's run of the mill. We need substantial, in-depth independent coverage of a person to meet GNG or NACTOR. Netherzone (talk) 19:58, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. I'd like to hear some voices from folks other than the nominator and page creator about this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Television. Netherzone (talk) 00:29, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails
wp:NACTOR. Nythar^T^.^C 00:45, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete As per Netherzone's reasoning above. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.