257:"does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor (obviously helpful changes, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand)"; allowing the page to remain, with whatever Cumberbatch-related material the banned editor included now expunged, is the most appropriate solution. Playing whack-a-mole with the banned editor has reached the disruptive level -- for example, yesterday a long-term, productive editor, who happens to live in the same metro area as Fairyspit and apparently has a slight editing overlap with them, was blocked as a sock, with scores of their image uploads deleted and many other edits undone, with the blocking admin for the moment unavailable to address the issue; Lady Lotus has removed content from this article declaring the
575:
her agent's website is a reliable source, despite it being considered a primary source. But there are plenty of secondary sources cited in the page to establish her notability. So, yes, she is notable. And I agree with users
Tomsculler, Hullaballoo and Wikicology. It's about the article. And it doesn't reference any famous friends of hers. The page is about her not her relations. The socks have already been banned. This discussion is about the notability of the subject, and it has been clearly established with reliable primary and secondary sources as seen in the page.
485:
certain banned editor has made it a project to create Wiki pages for everyone he knows. Many of the references cited are sketchy, like the subject's own CV, pages from her company's website, her agent's website, and so forth. The more impressive sources cite information that is not important enough to make her notable, such as the New York Times article that mentions her role as a witch in
Macbeth in passing.
230:, and now Sophie Hunter (because she is Cumberbatch's current girlfriend). In regards to Lyndsey Turner, it got so bad that Turner contacted the OPMS team and told them that because of the socks stalkerish and obsessive behavior, she didn't want a Knowledge page about her. This article should not be kept.
484:
Delete as non-notable. As has been stated, her career is unimpressive in the extreme and she has no more claim to notability than a million other middling theatre directors in the world. The only reason the article was created in the first place is because the subject has a very famous friend, and a
574:
as you have said in your argument as she was the vocalist of all the songs in that album and even starred in some music videos for it. And
Avianax she wasn't just mentioned in passing in the other New York Times article if you check, it was a review of The Shackleton Project. And an actor's CV from
217:
but the tag kept getting removed by IPs and by another user and finally was denied after saying the article was created prior to the ban but as you can see...it wasn't. This has nothing to do with notability, this has everything to do with the fact that allowing this article to be kept is allowing
275:
I didn't say the Boston Globe was unreliable, I said the peerage was unreliable. The IP added back a whole slew of information that was removed for a reason, the Boston Globe was an innocent bystander. This is about Sophie Hunter not about the SPI, and I don't know how Exec8 got on the list, but
320:
In addition to the whole sock thing, she doesn't seem that notable either. The majority of her acting career includes roles like "The
Girlfriend", and "Witch". She hasn't occured in more than one episode in a series and hasn't done anything significant in film or television which fails
178:
253:. The article subject is notable and the article contains no inappropriate content. There haven been multiple accounts editing the article, most likely including socks, as well as several legitimate editors.
444:
464:
261:
an unreliable source; and, not for the first time, LL has mass-nominated for G5 contributions that clearly predate the ban. Sometimes a selective response is better than a flamethrower.
424:
131:
172:
333:, both of which are non-notable projects, in wiki terms anyway and the majority of her references are either primary sources or mere mentions. So it fails
508:
She may have had bit parts as an actress (still, she was credited, she is not some kind of extra-for-rent) but she has directed plays reviewed by the
213:
who was banned on April 7, 2014, the article was created
September 13, 2014, clearly AFTER Fairyspit was banned. This is grounds for speedy delete
515:
138:
218:
the socks to get away with this behavior. Having dealt with these socks for a while, they have an irrational obsessive behavior towards
525:
384:. In addtion, article are not keep/deleted on the basis of who edit it but strictly on the basis of notability. Am neutral for now.
104:
99:
108:
266:
17:
91:
66:
193:
362:
at the
Battersea Arts Centre!), the only claim to notability is the Samuel Beckett award & I don't think thats enough.
160:
615:, again not an official reason for keeping, but (for me) an indication of strong interest on the part of our readers.--
262:
643:
40:
516:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/2012/02/10/entrancing-version-shackleton-tale/HrBKlbUDkEodjw485XMskK/story.html
254:
154:
580:
624:
606:
584:
494:
476:
456:
436:
415:
393:
371:
351:
309:
290:
270:
244:
150:
73:
639:
367:
322:
36:
620:
616:
602:
598:
533:
411:
407:
389:
385:
346:
304:
285:
239:
219:
200:
227:
186:
486:
594:
576:
526:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/theater/reviews/69s-at-bam-harvey-theater-review.html?_r=1&
223:
95:
60:
490:
472:
452:
432:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
638:
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
567:
547:
363:
166:
529:
340:
298:
279:
233:
557:
380:: I don't think the sock should be a debate topic here. The page has been protected by
210:
597:. Except not sure if we need agent website as source, enough other sources I think.--
403:
334:
87:
79:
54:
536:
for directing and writing her play. Her French-language album with songs written by
537:
468:
448:
428:
214:
125:
381:
52:, adequate sourcing has been provided to warrant an article (non-admin closure)
612:
276:
that's not what we are discussing. I request you stick to the topic at hand.
358:
Delete as non-notable. The acting career is unimpressive in the extreme (
632:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
528:) among others. And these were shows in known venues like the
445:
list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions
548:
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/album/isis-project/id68244687
568:
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2005/may/25/popandrock1
465:
list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions
121:
117:
113:
185:
558:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4556821.stm
425:
list of United
Kingdom-related deletion discussions
222:and will create articles solely to link it to it,
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
646:). No further edits should be made to this page.
570:) among others. Lady Lotus, she didn't direct
199:
8:
463:Note: This debate has been included in the
443:Note: This debate has been included in the
423:Note: This debate has been included in the
462:
442:
422:
263:The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo)
7:
295:Images can be un-deleted mind you...
209:This page was created by a sock of
24:
550:) and has been reviewed by the
402:Numerous references, meets the
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
611:Another thing. Check out the
74:04:24, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
625:21:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
607:13:27, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
585:07:08, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
495:05:58, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
477:02:40, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
457:02:40, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
437:02:40, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
416:22:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
394:21:57, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
372:20:07, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
352:19:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
310:19:14, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
291:19:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
271:18:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
245:17:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
663:
635:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
613:300+ pageviews each day
325:. She's also directed
540:is also available on
327:The Terrific Electric
534:Samuel Beckett Award
220:Benedict Cumberbatch
521:the New York Times
479:
459:
439:
350:
308:
289:
255:WP:Banning policy
243:
654:
637:
572:The Isis Project
532:where she won a
349:
343:
338:
331:The Isis Project
307:
301:
296:
288:
282:
277:
242:
236:
231:
204:
203:
189:
141:
129:
111:
69:
63:
57:
48:The result was
34:
662:
661:
657:
656:
655:
653:
652:
651:
650:
644:deletion review
633:
530:Barbican Centre
345:
339:
303:
297:
284:
278:
238:
232:
146:
137:
102:
86:
83:
67:
61:
55:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
660:
658:
649:
648:
629:
628:
627:
609:
588:
587:
500:
498:
497:
481:
480:
460:
440:
419:
418:
375:
374:
355:
354:
323:WP:ENTERTAINER
317:
316:
315:
314:
313:
312:
228:Lyndsey Turner
211:User:Fairyspit
207:
206:
143:
82:
77:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
659:
647:
645:
641:
636:
630:
626:
622:
618:
614:
610:
608:
604:
600:
596:
595:TheVerge24601
592:
591:
590:
589:
586:
582:
578:
577:TheVerge24601
573:
569:
565:
564:
559:
555:
554:
549:
545:
544:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
522:
517:
513:
512:
507:
503:
502:
501:
496:
492:
488:
483:
482:
478:
474:
470:
466:
461:
458:
454:
450:
446:
441:
438:
434:
430:
426:
421:
420:
417:
413:
409:
405:
401:
398:
397:
396:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
373:
369:
365:
361:
357:
356:
353:
348:
342:
336:
332:
328:
324:
319:
318:
311:
306:
300:
294:
293:
292:
287:
281:
274:
273:
272:
268:
264:
260:
256:
252:
249:
248:
247:
246:
241:
235:
229:
225:
221:
216:
212:
202:
198:
195:
192:
188:
184:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
152:
149:
148:Find sources:
144:
140:
136:
133:
127:
123:
119:
115:
110:
106:
101:
97:
93:
89:
88:Sophie Hunter
85:
84:
81:
80:Sophie Hunter
78:
76:
75:
72:
70:
64:
58:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
634:
631:
571:
562:
561:
552:
551:
542:
541:
538:Guy Chambers
520:
519:
511:Boston Globe
510:
509:
505:
499:
399:
377:
376:
359:
330:
326:
259:Boston Globe
258:
250:
208:
196:
190:
182:
175:
169:
163:
157:
147:
134:
53:
49:
47:
31:
28:
593:Agree with
364:TheLongTone
251:Speedy keep
224:Blacks Club
173:free images
617:Tomwsulcer
599:Tomwsulcer
560:) and the
408:Tomwsulcer
386:Wikicology
341:LADY LOTUS
299:LADY LOTUS
280:LADY LOTUS
234:LADY LOTUS
640:talk page
469:• Gene93k
449:• Gene93k
429:• Gene93k
37:talk page
642:or in a
563:Guardian
132:View log
56:Snuggums
39:or in a
518:) and
487:Avianax
378:Comment
360:Ubu Roi
179:WP refs
167:scholar
105:protect
100:history
543:iTunes
404:WP:GNG
382:Mike V
337:also.
335:WP:GNG
329:, and
151:Google
109:delete
506:KEEP'
215:WP:G5
194:JSTOR
155:books
139:Stats
126:views
118:watch
114:links
68:edits
16:<
621:talk
603:talk
581:talk
491:talk
473:talk
453:talk
433:talk
412:talk
400:Keep
390:talk
368:talk
347:TALK
305:TALK
286:TALK
267:talk
240:TALK
187:FENS
161:news
122:logs
96:talk
92:edit
62:talk
50:keep
553:BBC
406:.--
201:TWL
130:– (
623:)
605:)
583:)
493:)
475:)
467:.
455:)
447:.
435:)
427:.
414:)
392:)
370:)
344:•
302:•
283:•
269:)
237:•
226:,
181:)
124:|
120:|
116:|
112:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
65:/
619:(
601:(
579:(
566:(
556:(
546:(
524:(
514:(
504:'
489:(
471:(
451:(
431:(
410:(
388:(
366:(
265:(
205:)
197:·
191:·
183:·
176:·
170:·
164:·
158:·
153:(
145:(
142:)
135:·
128:)
90:(
71:)
59:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.