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. Courcelles 00:13, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amber Fleck Gaiennie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) • Afd statistics

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

I have concerns about notability, that this is primarily a promotional page, reliability of the sources (currently just her web page and IMDB), and some concerns that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. The Eskimo (talk) 21:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 22:45, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - There is no coverage about her in reliable sources. Her body of work as documented in IMDB appears to consist of a lot of uncredited roles. Those that are credited are things such as "Elvis concert goer". There is zero evidence of any significant roles at this point in her career. -- Whpq (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: I have no concerns about the subject's notability; she has none. She's a professional extra. Period. Fails the GNG and WP:BIO.  Ravenswing  14:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep None of the Above. The decision to delete a working actress smells bad when the subject page in question contains a beg for money message from Jimbo Wales. There is clearly way too much East Coast user/admin bias on these deletions. A television and radio broadcast is notible whether it be a long or short career. Actors and artistic performers should not be deleted by armchair critics who have no personal knowledge or have actually seen them perform. Rather than deletionism why not try to improve the content or reach out to the contributors by obtaining more information? There are more than sufficient film credits in any capacity to deserve the kind of dissing that goes on here.PsychClone —Preceding undated comment added 22:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Ignore troll's comments. JDDJS (talk) 21:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • Comment - You are welcome to improve the article as you claim it can. I fail to see how being an extra in some movies qualifies as notable. -- Whpq (talk) 19:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not notable. JDDJS (talk) 05:06, 14 November 2010 (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.