Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shanna Forrestall

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. MBisanz ^talk 13:25, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shanna Forrestall

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

Sometimes you take articles to AfD because you're convinced they need to be deleted; other times you take articles to AfD because you don't know what to do with them and you want the community to decide – this article is one of the latter. Subject has been a journey[man/person?] actress since 2005, but a quick perusal doesn't suggest she passes

WP:BEFORE work here and added info from a Variety and THR source, respectively, but it looks like there's nothing else out there on this subject. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:23, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:43, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable actress and film producer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:07, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I've done some clean up and added added a few more references.
WP:ATD. Hmlarson (talk) 23:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
- I still don't see how any of that clears her past
  WP:DATERET. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:45, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Weak keep This one is a "maybe" in my book. Interesting, seems to meet WP:GNG by significant coverage in her region, NACTOR is only one guideline to consider. Would like to see more sources, if possible. Montanabw ^(talk) 06:01, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:50, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:25, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 17:08, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This fails GNG. The coverage in reliable sources [1], [2] is restricted to passing mentions. The other sources which do have significant coverage are unfortunately all local sources (and even them some of them are interviews, and hence primary sources). This seemed OK at first glance, but it seems this is a newly established "online only magazine" which I tend to consider as
WP:TOOSOON. At this moment, not notable. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 11:30, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. there is nothing here that might possibly be notable except being host of a local show. That's not enough. DGG ( talk ) 22:04, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Technically, Southern Fried Homicide isn't "local" – it's on cable's Investigation Discovery channel. But I agree that the show itself isn't particularly notable, and the subject's only other credible claim to notability is the work she's done for the New Orleans film industry which I personally don't think is enough to justify an encyclopedia entry here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:01, 3 August 2016 (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.