Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Croix Provence

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:45, 10 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Croix Provence

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

References consist entirely of LinkedIn and IMDB references. No independent references, never mind non-trivial, secondary, verifiable, or reliable ones. KDS4444^Talk 15:55, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Once the social networks and primary sources are filtered out, there's nothing that would show WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG notability here. /wia /tlk 17:55, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:06, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:06, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as I simply see nothing better. Pinging users who may be interested to comment Rms125a@hotmail.com, MichaelQSchmidt and Davey2010. SwisterTwister talk 05:15, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: as per @Wikiisawesome. This is an utterly non-notable individual as actor or anything else. Fanpage crap. Quis separabit? 05:18, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Diligent WP:BEFORE shows sources available which could improve the article. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 05:52, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per MichaelQSchmidt - Well.... I did plan on !voting Delete but MQS's saved that, They're not perfect but they're better than what's there now. –Davey2010^Talk 09:23, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I really shouldn't !vote when I've just woke up , Annoyingly I did think this was a TOOSOON case but ended up thinking "Meh someone'll improve it eventually" .... Whatever Delete TOOSOON & all that . –Davey2010^Talk 13:19, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I performed some improvements but feel an article on her is simply TOO SOON. I had found sources speaking toward her, but not enough of them or in enough depth enough to really meet WP:GNG, and in researching learned that her film projects fail WP:ENT for there being in the most part small roles in short films. Sorry, Davey2010... this is "one" that the nominator got right in his scouting of brand new articles, so perhaps you might go with your original thought. If she does more and gets some decent coverage, the article can always be resurrected.Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.}

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.