Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Hall

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. asilvering (talk) 02:23, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Hall

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

Amy Hall (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While her works are somewhat notable, her herself isn't exactly, failing WP:GNG. It's a stub, I get it, but there's so little information on here and almost nothing on Google. We don't even know if she's alive or not. KrystalInfernus (talk) 17:22, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: She doesn't have any works of her own. She is an actress who has appeared in some notable stage works, but the article does not say what roles she played. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:35, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Well... if there are reviews of her performances in these works then that would count towards notability per the first criteria. Of course that would require sourcing - I'll see what I can find. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:31, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm finding coverage of her stage performances. Her movie/film roles are pretty much minor and background characters. Offhand, given some of the reviews of her stage performances thus far, she might prefer the article get deleted rather than have a summary of what they've been saying. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:45, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm leaning towards a keep here so far - she's been in some notable performances and has gotten mention to varying degrees. She doesn't seem to have met with any overwhelming success, but there's enough so far that she could probably pass criteria 1 of NACTOR. I will try to keep digging, though. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:56, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What WP:RSs have you found? -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've found multiple reviews of plays she's been in. The ones I'm using to count towards notability are the ones that specifically mention her within the body of the review. For example, Reuters, The Spectator, and The Guardian all call her out by name in reviews for Present Laughter and Hall received additional attention from The Guardian for We That Are Left. Her performances were also reviewed by the British Theater Guide, which looks usable - I've seen where it's been used as a RS in academic/scholarly texts published by De Gruyter, Palgrave Macmillan, Taylor & Francis, and so on. There was also a review by the Oldham Evening Chronicle, but that's not as high profile as the others. There was a paywalled review for The Doctor's Dilemma by The Stage. I can't tell if she was mentioned in that or not, so I'm not entirely counting that one.
Reviews for an actor's work can count towards notability for them and have traditionally qualified under criteria 1 of NACTOR. So on that note, I'm arguing for a keep. She's not some overwhelmingly notable stage actor, but she's also not some random who acts in the chorus or only has a single line role. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 13:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't think that the "reviews" mentioned can get us to GNG. She is mentioned in sources that review the plays, but, for example, the Reuters piece only says this about her performance:Hall is a bit too gushy as Daphne. The guardian has a few more words:Paul Woodson and Amy Hall give lovely unaffected performances as the youngsters trembling on the brink of an uncertain future. but that's all it says about her acting. The British Theatre Guide has one sentence about her character's place in the plot, but says nothing about her performance:The opening scenes show a star struck ingénue, played by Amy Hall, the morning after falling head over heels in love and into bed with our hero. A description of the character is not a review of the actor if nothing is said about the acting. I don't understand these brief mentions to be "significant coverage". Lamona (talk) 02:51, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep I would say she just meets WP:NACTOR, with significant roles in Present Laughter at the National Theatre, London; Blithe Spirit at the Oldham Coliseum Theatre; and in The Shape of Things and The Turn of the Screw at Neath (which I have added to the article). I have not been able to find more roles - part of the problem may be that when she might be expected to have roles and reviews, in the 10 years from 2008/09, there are quite a few publications which were not published digitally and have not yet been digitised (The Stage, for instance, on the British Newspaper Archive, goes up to 2007). I have found an actress called Amy Hall appearing in York in the 2020s (eg [1]) - but is that the same Amy Hall? RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:16, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There is some WP:NOTABILITY in the name itself. Upon researching further, the subject is indeed notable with several acting works throughout her career. There might be a need for copyedit and rewriting the article as the intro itself is just a few words in a line. For actors, we don't have specific described sources but more like sources that give their names. There shall be reliable sources that further strengthens reliability and notability but every outlet is reliable unless COI or considered unreliable. The Guardian, The BBC, The Hollywood reporter, Variety and more are some of the reliable sources already added here. Thus, improving the article is a sure need here including one parameter other than name Infobox but subject itself is notable enough.HilssaMansen19 (talk) 18:37, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:31, 27 April 2025 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Amy_Hall&oldid=1288851206"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Hall, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.