[go: up one dir, main page]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noah Cyrus (2nd nomination)

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 keep. Obvious Keep is obvious. (non-admin closure)Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 02:13, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Noah Cyrus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This actor fails WP:NACTOR, considering that none of the roles listed are significant. Being the voice in a re-dubbed film is almost notable, but subjectively I feel that this does not meet the threshold. Being related to other entertainers does not give someone notability. Though there are a few hits on google, they are not related to anything in the article and do not cover anything substantive or "remarkable" (most of the hits name her as Miley Cyrus' sister) only noting that she wears provocative clothing. If this person gains more significant experience in the future, the article should be recreated. Again if this person does more with their life in terms of activism or culture, she would gain notability (fundraising for PETA is again dubious notability [in itself]). Cocoaguy ここがいい 07:34, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Role as voice actor is significant but that is the only role that is and WP:NACTOR would like to see multiple significant roles, so NACTOR does not support article but cult following might apply. I think there is enough coverage in third party sources about her to meet WP:GNG as a celebrity in her own right independent of acting. Ones in article are light but she is getting some notoriety as a celebrity personality with causes. On balance I think passes the threshold for an article. Geraldo Perez (talk) 15:31, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Alright those actually good points. Cocoaguy ここがいい 17:45, 24 December 2015 (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.