388:, I’ve started rewriting the article, as of now I’ve been able to add sources, mostly for her film work as a sound designer and sound editor, which were unmentioned in the article prior to this.Additionally she’s won three ensemble SAG awards, and nominated for a fourth but another editor has disrupted them from being added to the article, there’s an RfC on the talk page to discuss the issue.
625:, meets GNG/BASIC. The spirit of verifiability is of course to ensure everything is true/no fraud, that has undoubtedly been met. Notability is a bit borderline until one looks at the breadth of her work as both an actor and sound editor on close to a hundred films, most of them notable. If it is borderline then I suggest we
510:
This isn't the place to discuss what should or shouldn't be in the article, but whether or not to keep the article, where the grounds for removal is a lack of notability. (I realize the two discussions are going on concurrently, but they should be kept separate.) As above, I'm confining myself to the
472:
Unless the nature of the award is that, when awarded to an overall excellent ensemble cast within which one or two performers are merely mediocre, they give it only to the excellent performers and not the mediocre ones, then it is not an award recognizing the individual excellence of any one of them
343:
I watched the whole OITNB series and remember her character well but I have to agree with you. Her role in that very large ensemble cast was minor, as all her other roles have been, and there is no independent significant coverage of her. I found a couple of interviews, including a single paragraph
552:
refs seem just to show that she was a part of the sound team/editor for those films rather than proving her notability. She has shared a nomination for a MPSE award but that in itself is not a significant achievement. The SAG cast awards were shared with 37 others so again not significant. I can't
238:
but little else. For OITNB, received no recognition or significant coverage. Overall, no significant coverage in secondary independent sources. Article currently has three links to Savage's own twitter and one interview from a blogger. My search prior to this nomination could not find any further
430:
I did go to check out the sources you've added. But I saw that there are 35 of them, and I'm not going to open them all, not knowing which of them might contribute to notability and which you added merely to verify something in the article's content. Would you mind indicating which of them you
411:
won" an award recognizing the entirety of the (in this case large) cast, not the individual achievement of any one of them, is not accurate; and, in her case, she was a minor character. She acquires no notability of her own through these, and
203:
260:
571:
I’m still finding sources, I think she meets BASIC, and her notability is 75% sound editor/25% actor as of yet. If she died today her obituary would be the tipping point.
164:
197:
629:
unless we agree on what this article’s tipping point is; it’s already an acceptable start, and our readers will come away with a good understanding of who she is.
300:
280:
111:
96:
453:
Every listed cast member gets the award, even for a large cast, they didn’t carve out exceptions. She won the award as did all the other cast members.
655:
a google search doesn’t show sufficient in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources to warrant a standalone article at the moment.
137:
132:
548:
Thanks for trying to improve the article. I've haven't looked through all the references. The majority of the new refs including the
141:
491:
That’s an interesting position. Could you clarify which policy or guideline prohibits listing an ensemble award in our articles?
124:
91:
84:
17:
218:
185:
105:
101:
725:
329:
40:
179:
696:
708:
683:
666:
639:
617:
581:
566:
539:
520:
501:
482:
463:
444:
425:
398:
380:
357:
333:
313:
292:
272:
252:
175:
66:
662:
413:
529:
Perhaps winning three SAG awards, and nominated for a fourth would be a consideration of her notability?
721:
36:
225:
704:
679:
648:
516:
478:
440:
421:
353:
325:
268:
211:
128:
562:
288:
248:
239:
sources to prove notability from reliable independent secondary sources. Therefore does not meet
657:
80:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
720:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
692:
632:
610:
574:
554:
532:
494:
456:
391:
376:
368:
348:
article profiling four same-sex married couples, but those don't help establish notability.
306:
240:
191:
700:
675:
652:
512:
474:
436:
417:
349:
264:
120:
72:
626:
558:
432:
284:
244:
57:
158:
372:
695:#1 with multiple and significant roles in major productions. Her role in
607:, Article overhauled, everything referenced. I’m still looking for more.
299:
Note: This discussion has been included in the
Article Rescue Squadron's
324:
not enough significant roles in notable productions to show notability.
367:
Simply not enough coverage to come even close to notability as per
716:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
674:. High quality page. Excellent job with the improvements.
553:
see why she currently meets any of the three criteria per
261:
list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions
154:
150:
146:
210:
473:and cannot be construed as an indication of such.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
728:). No further edits should be made to this page.
279:Note: This discussion has been included in the
259:Note: This discussion has been included in the
224:
8:
112:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
298:
281:list of Women-related deletion discussions
278:
258:
301:list of content for rescue consideration
699:alone gives her the notoriety needed.
431:believe are qualifying sources under
7:
24:
97:Introduction to deletion process
234:Has had one supporting role in
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
709:18:07, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
684:00:28, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
667:14:38, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
640:10:47, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
618:10:47, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
582:20:06, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
567:12:31, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
540:04:21, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
314:13:28, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
67:01:57, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
521:21:59, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
502:21:53, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
483:21:43, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
464:20:31, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
445:20:11, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
426:20:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
414:notability is not inherited
399:17:50, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
381:17:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
358:12:42, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
334:12:38, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
293:12:07, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
273:11:58, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
253:11:53, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
87:(AfD)? Read these primers!
745:
718:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
697:Orange is the New Black
236:Orange Is The New Black
511:notability question.
85:Articles for deletion
647:— Per rationale by
407:Well, precisely: "
344:quoting her in an
326:John Pack Lambert
316:
295:
275:
102:Guide to deletion
92:How to contribute
63:
736:
638:
635:
616:
613:
580:
577:
538:
535:
500:
497:
462:
459:
397:
394:
312:
309:
229:
228:
214:
162:
144:
82:
62:
60:
55:
34:
744:
743:
739:
738:
737:
735:
734:
733:
732:
726:deletion review
649:Johnpacklambert
633:
630:
611:
608:
575:
572:
533:
530:
495:
492:
457:
454:
392:
389:
307:
304:
171:
135:
119:
116:
79:
76:
58:
56:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
742:
740:
731:
730:
712:
711:
691:easily passes
686:
669:
642:
620:
601:
600:
599:
598:
597:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
589:
588:
587:
586:
585:
584:
543:
542:
524:
523:
505:
504:
486:
485:
467:
466:
448:
447:
428:
402:
401:
383:
361:
360:
337:
336:
318:
317:
296:
276:
232:
231:
168:
121:Abigail Savage
115:
114:
109:
99:
94:
77:
75:
73:Abigail Savage
70:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
741:
729:
727:
723:
719:
714:
713:
710:
706:
702:
698:
694:
690:
687:
685:
681:
677:
673:
670:
668:
664:
660:
659:
654:
650:
646:
643:
641:
637:
636:
628:
624:
621:
619:
615:
614:
606:
603:
602:
583:
579:
578:
570:
569:
568:
564:
560:
556:
551:
547:
546:
545:
544:
541:
537:
536:
528:
527:
526:
525:
522:
518:
514:
509:
508:
507:
506:
503:
499:
498:
490:
489:
488:
487:
484:
480:
476:
471:
470:
469:
468:
465:
461:
460:
452:
451:
450:
449:
446:
442:
438:
434:
429:
427:
423:
419:
415:
410:
406:
405:
404:
403:
400:
396:
395:
387:
384:
382:
378:
374:
370:
366:
363:
362:
359:
355:
351:
347:
342:
339:
338:
335:
331:
327:
323:
320:
319:
315:
311:
310:
302:
297:
294:
290:
286:
282:
277:
274:
270:
266:
262:
257:
256:
255:
254:
250:
246:
242:
237:
227:
223:
220:
217:
213:
209:
205:
202:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
184:
181:
177:
174:
173:Find sources:
169:
166:
160:
156:
152:
148:
143:
139:
134:
130:
126:
122:
118:
117:
113:
110:
107:
103:
100:
98:
95:
93:
90:
89:
88:
86:
81:
74:
71:
69:
68:
65:
64:
61:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
717:
715:
688:
671:
658:Celestina007
656:
644:
631:
622:
609:
604:
573:
549:
531:
493:
455:
408:
390:
385:
364:
345:
340:
321:
305:
235:
233:
221:
215:
207:
200:
194:
188:
182:
172:
78:
54:
53:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
198:free images
701:Lightburst
676:Right cite
653:Largoplazo
513:Largoplazo
475:Largoplazo
437:Largoplazo
418:Largoplazo
350:Largoplazo
722:talk page
693:WP:NACTOR
555:WP:NACTOR
369:WP:NACTOR
265:Shellwood
241:WP:NACTOR
59:JGHowes
37:talk page
724:or in a
559:Cowlibob
346:Advocate
285:TJMSmith
245:Cowlibob
165:View log
106:glossary
39:or in a
605:Comment
550:Variety
386:Comment
204:WP refs
192:scholar
138:protect
133:history
83:New to
651:&
645:Delete
627:WP:IAR
433:WP:GNG
373:Jeppiz
365:Delete
341:Delete
322:Delete
176:Google
142:delete
409:she's
219:JSTOR
180:books
159:views
151:watch
147:links
16:<
705:talk
689:Keep
680:talk
672:Keep
663:talk
634:Glee
623:Keep
612:Glee
576:Glee
563:talk
534:Glee
517:talk
496:Glee
479:talk
458:Glee
441:talk
422:talk
393:Glee
377:talk
354:talk
330:talk
308:Glee
289:talk
269:talk
249:talk
212:FENS
186:news
155:logs
129:talk
125:edit
226:TWL
163:– (
707:)
682:)
665:)
565:)
557:.
519:)
481:)
443:)
435:?
424:)
416:.
379:)
371:.
356:)
332:)
303:.
291:)
283:.
271:)
263:.
251:)
243:.
206:)
157:|
153:|
149:|
145:|
140:|
136:|
131:|
127:|
52:.
703:(
678:(
661:(
561:(
515:(
477:(
439:(
420:(
375:(
352:(
328:(
287:(
267:(
247:(
230:)
222:·
216:·
208:·
201:·
195:·
189:·
183:·
178:(
170:(
167:)
161:)
123:(
108:)
104:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.